Exposing The New World Translation: Part 1
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июн 2022
- #exjw #pimo #bible
Chicken Scratch Apologetics, this will focus on the Jehovah's Witness's Bible, the New World Translation. 1 of 2 Parts, looking into the name Jehovah, and where the NWT has removed words to push their doctrine.
Watch Part 2 Here ---- • Exposing The New World...
I love your videos. I woke up from being a JW for 45 years. It was the “doctoring” of the Bible that opened my eyes. Along with our Lord and Savior!! Among other responsibilities, I worked at JW headquarters (Bethel) for a few years. Coming to realize the lies was one of the hardest conclusions I’ve ever encountered.
THE BIBLE teaches that Jesus was MADE As Lord and Christ and as Son (ACTS 2:36, Prov 8, HEB 1:5), CREATED/PRODUCED/INSTALLED (Prov 8) , COME INTO BEING/MADE (Mat 21:42 - egeneto) and GIVEN LIFE by the Father - John 5:26 and it uses TODAY (Heb 1:5), and uses future tenses and is a prophecy in Isa 9:6 (Isa 9:6, - WILL BE) . If you are called MADE AND CREATED AND GIVEN LIFE, and NEVER CALLED in the BIBLE as Creator or Maker , then you are A CREATION. ALL FROM THE BIBLE
From the Lord was this (this is referring to the chief cornerstone who is Jesus) , the word WAS is egeneto (made or came into being) - Matthew 21:42 and the exact Greek word used in John 1:3 - MADE, egeneto (came into being) - JESUS WAS MADE/CAME INTO BEING FROM THE FATHER , yes, Jesus was MADE/CREATED!, See also Acts 2:36, Heb 1:5, 1 john 5
Isa 9:6 the word Prince in the Prince of Peace means PATRON ANGEL also Leader. WHO IS the ONE LEADER that we have? Jesus. Now, that same exact Hebrew word was used for Daniel 12:1 which is used for Michael the Archangel. So are you saying there are MANY LEADERS now?
JESUS IS Lord! His Lordship was MADE - See Acts 2. Who is the Sovereign Lord? He is different from Jesus as mentioned in Acts 4:24, 26, 30
There is no term God of gods or Creator or Maker used for Jesus.Acts 4:24 - who is NOT Jesus and who is called Sovereign Lord - "one accord to God and said: “Sovereign Lord, you are the One who made the heaven and the earth " Who is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from Jesus who is the Anointed and the Sovereign Lord's SERVANT as Acts 4:30 mentioned "through the name of YOUR holy servant Jesus.”" Acts 4:26 - one against Jehovah and against his ANOINTED one.
GOD IS NOT A LITERAL TORTURER. GOD is LOVE. He only gives eternal life to those who exercise faith in him and his Son (John 3:16, John 14:1) and NOT TO WICKED people. The Wicked will VANISH AND WILL BE NO MORE. Psalms 37:20
How many is Jehovah? Trinitarians say there are THREE Jehovah. What does the Bible say? There is ONE JEHOVAH and NOT THREE JEHOVAH. Deut 6:4. - “Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah
WHO IS THE STAR IN NUMBERS 24:17? That is Jesus. It is the same Hebrew word used in Job 38:7 for the morning stars. So as Jesus is called THE BRIGHT morning star (REV 22:16) so also are the other morning stars(angels). So Jesus is the CHIEF Angel with the archangel's voice (1 Thes 4:16). Jesus is called Prince of Peace in Isa 9:6 and the original Hebrew word for Prince means PATRON ANGEL which is the same Hebrew Word used for Michael the archangel in Daniel.
Jesus is the High Priest and the High Priest is NOT GOD himself.
GOD DOES NOT WORSHIP HIMSELF : John 4:22 -You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation begins with the Jews.
Jesus Included himself IN WORSHIPPING THE FATHER. ONLY A CREATION WILL WORSHIP GOD.
If the holy Spirit is a PERSON then now you have MANY PERSONS IN ONE GOD. REV 5:6 - seven eyes, and the eyes mean the seven spirits of God.SO NOW YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL SEVEN PERSONS IN GOD.
Who is the cause of Salvation? Both GOD and the lamb are saviors, Rev 7:9-10, even Jesus needed to be saved by the Father from death as the Father is the SOURCE OF LIFE AND SALVATION , Hebrews 5:7 & John 5:26 - THE FATHER GAVE THE SON LIFE.
Does the Bible called Jesus MADE AND BORN? Yes! JESUS is the Messiah and a CREATION BY GOD! He is called “BORN OF/FROM GOD”. (1 JOHN 5:18) Hebrews 1:5 showed that Jesus was MADE/BORN (orig Greek-gennaw). Also it says "he will become my son" Notice, FUTURE TENSE, WILL, so before that the SON DID NOT EXIST. If you are BORN AND MADE then you are a creation. , Hebrews 1:5 mentions I WILL BECOME HIS FATHER, so Jesus relationship with the Father has a BEGINNING, When ? it was TODAY. TODAY implies a beginning.
When did Jesus become SON? Even before Jesus became human he is called SON , Prov 30:4
Was Jesus GIVEN LIFE?
He is called the firstborn and beginning of the CREATION BY GOD (COL 1, Revelation ) Also john 5:26 mentions that the FATHER GAVE JESUS, THE SON, with LIFE. If Jesus was given LIFE OR EVEN ETERNAL LIFE, then Jesus does not have life or eternal life before those were given to him. Notice, the Father was NOT given life.
JESUS was MADE LORD (ACTS 2:36).JOHN 6:57 - Jesus Said “ I LIVE BEC OF THE FATHER” SO JESUS’ LIFE was dependent on the Father and his SOURCE OF LIFE/Eternal Life IS THE FATHER as John 5:26 states as well. 1john 5:1 - Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born from God,+ and everyone who loves the one who caused to be born loves him who has been born from that one . who is this that HAS BEEN BORN from that one? That is Jesus! 1 John 5:18 - Jesus is called BORN FROM GOD JESUS IS BORN FROM GOD, 1 JOHN 5:18 - We know that everyone who has been born from God does not practice sin, but the one born from God* watches him, and the wicked one cannot take hold of him . WHO is the ONE BORN FROM GOD that watches us and protects us and who does not sin? JESUS CHRIST!
HAS ANYONE SEEN GOD?
NO MAN HAS SEEN GOD and if they see GOD's face THEY WILL DIE. Jesus was seen by many and they didn't DIE so Jesus Is Not The Almighty God. Jesus is called SON even before coming to earth as human. Exo 33:20 states "“You cannot see my face, for no man can see me and live.”" NO MAN CAN SEE ME, notice ME , you think ME IS NOT LITERAL? IT IS LITERAL "ME" WHO IS GOD.
Rom 8:1 when both Tyndale and the Geneva Bible show no NOW. so you are actually against those Bibles and even Tyndale. the Sahidic Coptic Text does not have ME in John 14:14, so you are against that Bible text
@Mr.D2C.1914
And yet, you are still commanded to serve Jesus
You are still commanded to love Jesus more than your own life.
(Matthew 10:37-39)(John 12:26)
You are still commanded to honor Jesus JUST AS you honor the Father(John 5:23)
............................................
I guess that makes you a polytheistic 🤔(read Exodus 20)
Wikipedia says the new world translation is the most accurate stop 🛑 watching him
@@chasethomas91Wikipedia doesn't say that. Start watching him.
"What leading Greek scholars say about the NWT:
Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT "a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature)
Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."
British scholar H.H. Rowley stated, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not be translated."
"Well, as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had misquoted me in support of their translation." (These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation", Mantey is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation)
Dr. Julius Mantey , author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the NWT "a shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'"
"I have never read any New Testament so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a translation." (Julius Mantey , Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137)
the translators of the NWT are "diabolical deceivers." (Julius Mantey in discussion with Walter Martin)
Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."
Google Bruce Metzer, Marcus Borg, N.T. Wright, Elaine Pagels, Dominic Crossan-they all believe the NWT is a travesty. It is very bad. These people studied Koine Greek and the social/political world for decades."
Love your videos. They aren’t long drawn out history lessons that quickly lose me. They are straight and to the point easy for me to understand.
Thanks! That was my goal and glad it comes across that way.
Thank you SO MUCH for your work!
Hey, really excellent job on the videos I've seen so far. I want you to be encouraged and know that the work you're doing is valuable and has an effect, at least on me. Thank you
Thank you so much for this video!!!
I been waiting for this video
Brilliant summary! 😊😊
This is so well done! Very to the point. When I was in, the 2013 bible was the game changer for me. It was obvious at that time things were not what it seemed. It was all down hill from there. Still took me until 2017 to be fully awake.
Rom 8:1 when both Tyndale and the Geneva Bible show no NOW. so you are actually against those Bibles and even Tyndale. the Sahidic Coptic Text does not have ME in John 14:14, so you are against that Bible text
If you really were awake then you would be on the Watchtower Isaiah 21:8
Well done. I have never had a JW give me an answer when I've asked which Bible was wrong in regard to John 14:14-the NWT or the Kingdom Interlinear.
I'd be interested in seeing you do a video on their ridiculous claim that some mystery group removed the tetragrammaton from the NT. It's a nice little story for them until you start asking questions like:
- Who is this mystery group?
- Why did they do it?
- How did they do it? They believe the tetragrammaton wasn't removed until after John died which means some of Paul's letters had already been in circulation all over the empire for over 40 years. How did they track down all the copies and how did people not notice the change? Christians in Noth Africa had a fit when Jerome changed "gourd" to "ivy" in Jonah so how would Christians not notice the tetragrammaton going missing?
- What evidence do they have for the inclusion of the tetragrammaton in the NT?
- Etc.
Keep up the good work. You have some great videos 👍
That’s a really good idea. That claim has always been a head shaker for me. It goes a level beyond conspiracy and into the realm of absurdity. It’s a way to call the Bible corrupt, and implant that idea with its members.
the SAHIDIC COPTIC text does not have ME in John 14:14 , so stop your lies that the NWT is the one mistranslating
@@Mr.DC3.1914 Does your Kingdom Interlinear have it?
@@Mr.DC3.1914 who’s the Mediator dx, is it the Father or the Son?
@@LightoverDarkMinistry switching topic? the Mediator is the SON. Jesus is the Way to the Father
I have a copy of the Kingdom Interlinear. It is amazing that it reads one thing on the left and another on the right. And its amazing no JWs question it.
thats because they have to ttwist the scriptures to fit their own man made, false theology!
yet they are blinded by some, "new light" that has not nor will never come..
the light may get brighter however theres NO "new light"...
jesus said, "I AM the light of the world"...glory be unto God and our Savior christ Jesus
The interlinear translation would not read the same as the NWT English translation....because it is an interlinear! The interlinear by its very nature will not take into consideration grammar while a full translation would.
@@newworldtranslation1162 That makes absolutely no sense what so ever. I think what you meant to say is the interlinear does not take into consideration bias while the NWT is biased. Bible versions I use look pretty much like the interlinear. The modern versions even more so.
@@wfqsfg. What I said was perfectly right. An interlinear of the GNT just translates the individual words. It does not take into consideration Greek grammar. This would apply to any full English translation. Hence they, any interlinear and any full English translation will read quite different to each other. Perhaps you can give me just one example where the NWT does not agree with the interlinear?
@@brucebarnard Ok, I'm looking for Bruce Barnard and what you previously said. Did you quickly change your moniker?
Apparently you haven't watched the video. Plenty of examples. Why are you annoying me and not other Christians on here?
"Jehovah’s Witnesses wanted a translation that embodied the benefits of the latest scholarship, one that was not colored by the creeds and traditions of Christendom, a literal translation that faithfully presented what is in the original writings and so could provide the basis for continued growth in knowledge of divine truth, a translation that would be clear and understandable to modern-day readers." -- Jehovah's Witnesses-Proclaimers of God's Kingdom, p608-609.
If the goal was to create a translation that was "clear and understandable", why do they still teach that "the greatly diversified wisdom of God can become known only through Jehovah’s channel of communication, the faithful and discrete slave"? -- Watchtower, Oct 1, 1994, p8 *Why would God inspire the creation of scripture only to render it incomprehensible to all but a few?*
OR....
"Unless we are in touch with this channel of communication that God is using, we will not progress along the road to life, no matter how much Bible reading we do.”
-- Watchtower, Dec 1, 1981
If their bible cannot be understood without the interference of some highly placed group of individuals with no biblical scholarship, it would seem they failed in their mission to create a "clear and understandable" translation.
The New World Translation is not regarded by any credible translation scholar as being an accurate translation. It is regarded (rightly) as actually a perversion, put out by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Jason BeDuhn is sometimes appealed to by JWs as a "scholar" who supports the NWT. He is a professor of religious studies. That is not by any means the same thing as an accredited translation scholar. He has no degrees in biblical languages. He is not a qualified translation expert.
JWs are told by their leaders (whom they follow with no questions) that the people who put it together were well-qualified to do so. Okay so who are they and what and where are their credentials in translation studies? If the JW claim of them being well-qualified is true, then produce the names and credentials so everyone can see for themselves.
The truth is - When anyone reads the NWT, they are reading a book that was put together by a bunch of people, and you have no idea at all whether they were qualified to do translation work. The NWT was created by the JWs in order to say what their doctrines say - Their doctrines came first - then the NWT was created to back them. This is totally backwards.
Think, JWs - The JW doctrines came first, and then a "Bible" was created that supports them. Does that sound "right" to you?
No one need take my word for this - Go here and make up your own mind: www.gotquestions.org/New-World-Translation.html
@@jamesritter5078 I wasn't supporting the NWT. Quite the opposite. My comments were intended to show how their own statements about the incomprehensible nature of scripture (as they see it) conflicts with their goal of producing a more understandable translation. Since they're still preaching that you can't understand the bible without their accompanying documentation, it seems they've proven the failure of their own translation to be more understandable, or at least to a degree that the tutelage of some anointed class is no longer required.
@@evanwindom3265 - I know you were not. I was just piggy-backing on your post.
The warning on adding too and taking away from GOD's word in the bible is pretty clear. These people have blatantly ignored it.
Great video! Very interesting that they replace with "Jehovah" the "Lord" words that apply to Jesus, might be an unconscious confession of Jesus' deity 😂
The Father has his own name Proverbs 30:4
Great video. What are the names of the translators for the NWT. Dr Walter Martin was one of the first to find out the names of the NWT committee. None of them had any qualifications to translate from Hebrew or Greek.
What is surprising is the following: Doctors Nurses Solicitors Carpenters Plumbers Electricians Mechanics ETC ETC. need qualifications, but to be a translator for an ARCHAIC language, and to be on the NWT translating committee you only have to be able to read English. No Hebrew or Greek required.
When JWs insist their Doctors, Plumbers, Electricians MUST BE QUALIFIED, but the Translators of the NWT Committee only have to basically have the same qualifications as the Road Worker digging holes in the road. Speaking English is their only qualifications.
Another contradiction is their NWT Committee should always remain Anonymous, however they name other translators of Other Bibles to try and support the NWT. No glory to their translators, but they will glorify other translators by mentioning their names. (Usually without their consent)
A 1st year student of Greek or Hebrew would be the most qualified on that committee. What a disgrace and complete contempt they have for handling God's Precious Book.
BELOW ARE THE NWT TRANSLATING COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
QUALIFICATIONS IN HEBREW : NONE
QUALIFICATIONS IN KOINE GREEK : NONE
Frederick W.Franz. Other members included Nathan H. Knorr (then president of the Jehovah's Witnesses), Albert D. Schroeder, Ceorge D. Gangas and Milton Henschel.
Their motto for being a member of the NWT translating committee.
"if you can read Hebrew or Greek, you are OVER QUALIFIED for this position"
"anyone other than Year 10 English Speaking skills NEED NOT APPLY."
While I’ll go more into detail about this in the next part, several of these “translators” didn’t even graduate high school. Either we should suppose these handful of uneducated have a superior understanding of Koine Greek, and all scholarship for the last 500 years should be thrown out…or…the translators were charlatans.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry Thank you again for the thorough work you do. What blows my mind is when handling God's precious words, the LESS you are qualified to translate God's word, The MORE you will be required to be on the NWT translating committee.
I think one very important removal is in Zechariah 12:10 , which in ESV reads: "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn." (clearly stating that Jehova and Jesus are one) and NWT renders "and they will certainly look to the One whom they pierced" (1984 ed, with a note that some translations use "to me whom") and the 2013 version writes "and they will look to the one whom they pierced", removing the note as well. It is actually very interesting to compare the 1984 and 2013 versions, because some changes the had on the earlier version and were indicated with [ ], indicating that the content was not in the original, had the brackets removed, making the reader believe the text is completely faithfull to the manuscripts.
The message is the most important, wether you inset me or not, the message is not changed
The “New World Translation”-Scholarly and Honest
Back in the 16th century, opposers said that Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible was "FULL of falsifications!” They believed they could prove that Luther’s Bible 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”!
The New World Translation Bible
In this 20th century, the New World Translation has also been charged with falsification. Why? Because it departs from the traditional rendering of many verses and stresses the use of God’s name, Jehovah. Hence, it is unconventional. But does this make it false? No. It was produced with much care and attention to detail, and what may appear unfamiliar represents a sincere effort to represent carefully the nuances of the original languages. 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.” Let us consider some examples of this.
They do the same with the word stake. For example, Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29, 1 Peter 2:24 and Gal 3:13 translated the correct way is TREE according to Greek Interlinear, however, Watchtower replaces it with the word STAKE.
NIV says a pole
Galatians 3:13 NIV a pole
Shalom from Australia 🇦🇺 🦘 My favourite bible is "THE SCIPTURES 2009 Edition".
Other Translations Support the NWTCertain unfamiliar terms supposedly invented by Jehovah’s Witnesses are supported by other Bible translations or reference works. At Luke 23:43, the New World Translation records Jesus’ words to the criminal executed with him: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” In the original Greek, there were no punctuation marks such as commas; but usually some kind of punctuation is inserted by translators to help with the reading. Most, however, make Luke 23:43 read as though Jesus and the criminal were bound for Paradise that very day. The New English Bible reads: “I tell you this: today you shall be with me in Paradise.” Not all convey this thought, however. Professor Wilhelm Michaelis renders the verse: “Truly, already today I give you the assurance: (one day) you will be together with me in paradise.” This rendering is much more logical than that of The New English Bible. The dying criminal could not have gone with Jesus to Paradise that same day. Jesus was not resurrected until the third day after his death. In the meantime he was in Hades, mankind’s common grave.-Acts 2:27, 31; 10:39, 40.
According to Matthew 26:26 in the New World Translation, Jesus, when instituting the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, says of the bread that he passes to his disciples: “This means my body.” Most other translations render this verse: “This is my body,” and this is used to support the doctrine that during the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, the bread literally becomes Christ’s flesh. The word translated in the New World Translation as “means” (es·tin´, a form of ei·mi´) comes from the Greek word meaning “to be,” but it can also signify “to mean.” Thus, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament says that this verb “is often i.q. [equivalent to] to denote, signify, import.” Indeed, “means” is a logical translation here. When Jesus instituted the Last Supper, his flesh was still on his bones, so how could the bread have been his literal flesh?
John 1:1c - NWT is Not AloneAt 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, the same God.-John 14:28; 20:17.
NWT Only Restored God's Name in Places Where the Greek Scripture Writers Quoted it From the Hebrew Text
God’s Personal Name
At Luke 4:18, according to the New World Translation, Jesus applied to himself a prophecy in Isaiah, saying: “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me.” (Isaiah 61:1) Many object to the use of the name Jehovah here. It is, however, just one of the more than 200 places where that name appears in the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, the so-called New Testament. True, no early surviving Greek manuscript of the “New Testament” contains the personal name of God. But the name was included in the New World Translation for sound reasons, not merely on a whim. And others have followed a similar course. In the German language alone, at least 11 versions use “Jehovah” (or the transliteration of the Hebrew, “Yahweh”) in the text of the “New Testament,” while four translators add the name in parentheses after “Lord.” More than 70 German translations use it in footnotes or commentaries.
In Israel, God’s name was pronounced without inhibition for more than a thousand years. It is the name that appears most frequently in the Hebrew Scriptures (“Old Testament”), and there is no convincing proof that it was unknown to the general public or that its pronunciation had been forgotten in the first century of our Common Era, when Jewish Christians were inspired to write the books of the “New Testament.”-Ruth 2:4.
Wolfgang Feneberg comments in the Jesuit magazine Entschluss/Offen (April 1985): “He [Jesus] did not withhold his father’s name YHWH from us, but he entrusted us with it. It is otherwise inexplicable why the first petition of the Lord’s Prayer should read: ‘May your name be sanctified!’” Feneberg further notes that “in pre-Christian manuscripts for Greek-speaking Jews, God’s name was not paraphrased with kýrios [Lord], but was written in the tetragram form [YHWH] in Hebrew or archaic Hebrew characters. . . . We find recollections of the name in the writings of the Church Fathers; but they are not interested in it. By translating this name kýrios (Lord), the Church Fathers were more interested in attributing the grandeur of the kýrios to Jesus Christ.” The New World Translation restores the name to the text of the Bible wherever there is sound, scholarly reason to do so.-See Appendix 1D in the Reference Bible.
Some criticize the form “Jehovah” by which the New World Translation renders God’s name. In Hebrew manuscripts, the name appears just as four consonants, YHWH, and many insist that the proper pronunciation is “Yahweh,” not “Jehovah.” Hence, they feel that using “Jehovah” is a mistake. But, in truth, scholars are by no means in agreement that the form “Yahweh” represents the original pronunciation. The fact is that while God preserved the spelling of his name “YHWH” over 6,000 times in the Bible, he did not preserve the pronunciation of it that Moses heard on Mount Sinai. (Exodus 20:2) Therefore, the pronunciation is not of the utmost importance at this time.
In Europe the form “Jehovah” has been widely recognized for centuries and is used in many Bibles, including Jewish translations. It appears countless times on buildings, on coins and other objects, and in printed works, as well as in many church hymns. So rather than trying to represent the original Hebrew pronunciation, the New World Translation in all its different languages uses the form of God’s name that is popularly accepted. This is exactly what other Bible versions do with all the other names in the Bible.
Why the Harsh Criticism?
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. The New World Translation-indeed, any Bible-makes this evident.
In fact, the New World Translation is a scholarly work. 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.” -March 1, 1991 Watchtower, page 26-30. WTBTS
Great teaching and so true!! If your religion doesn't match Gods Word, then God must be wrong, correct?! The Watchtower takes pride in fixing all of Gods mistakes in His Word to bring Him inline with proper JW thinking... ;^(
The English language changes
@@Scott23882 but God's Word does not change. We don't need to change it to match our own beliefs. If our beliefs are contrary to God's Word, we need to change our beliefs to bring them inline with God's Word.
@@rickyoung360 my comment still holds true
@@Scott23882 or people change and then attempt to change the language to suit their ideals and notions. remember God CONFOUNDED the language at the tower of Babel..and since, all mankind has been doing is just that...BABBLING!
ESV Then he who saw cried out: "Upon a watchtower I stand, O Lord, continually by day, and at my post I am stationed whole nights. NIV And the lookout shouted, "Day after day, my lord, I stand on the watchtower; every night I stay at my post.
❤
Using the NWT compare Genesis 28: 13 (God talking to Jacob) with Exodus 6: 2-3 (God talking to Moses). Appears that the NWT is making God out to be a liar.
I think Moses actually did use YHWH in genesis, ESV and niv use LORD there too, probably because the Israelites already knew God's personal name, but still does not back JW's doctrine
DH, are you able to post a link to codex sinaiticus. Every time a try to post a link it gets deleted. Thanks
codexsinaiticus.org/en/
@@LightoverDarkMinistry Thanks. DX refused to accept my word that the Greek Septuagint doesn't contain "angel" in Zech 3:2. He insisted that I give him a link to codex sinaiticus so he could see it for himself.
@@kevinfromcanada4379 my Lord (Jesus) and my God (the Father)
@@Scott23882 Are you a JW?
Acts 20:28} Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.
Excellent.
Blessings
Great stuff
The 1984 NWT Reference Bible has Me in the foot note. The governing body knows that they are hiding the deity of Jesus. The have in many places!
8:32 Hmm.... did the apostle John misquote Zechariah 12:10 in John 19:37?
This is a debated text, and as I mentioned, instead of addressing the issue, they removed a word, so instead of letting people reason for themselves, they are telling them what to believe.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry
Not at all Hebrew manuscripts contain "me". The apostle John translated it as "they will look upon the one whom they pierced". Do you think John was wrong? If not, why do you think the NWT are wrong?
(I messed up with the septuagint sorry) The original message was to say it is not debated, it is to an extent in the sense as to if Paul was quoting word per word but to my knowledge it isn't in a translation sense. @@LightoverDarkMinistry
@@Bowen12676 The NWT has many other texts as to where they misquote the manuscripts as mentioned in this very video. The Greek Septuagint used the Geek word με, which is what the early Christian and Apostles would have used. Paul is not quoting word to word taking it into proper context.
Remember, Stephen when he was being stoned prayed to Jesus before he died:) I just want to hear the history of the writers of this evil translation and what their complete story it.
LORD isn't a name.... Its a title.
You know the same people that aaaah you get it 😂.
No noooooo!
Hey man dont dig to much cause we dont what to stumble with the truth ow man no no
You can only imagine 🤔 that thing called the truth can set you free.
And then how will our gig work 😮
If you want to use a poetic sounding translation for funerals, weddings, etc., you can't beat the King James Version. For study purposes, I prefer using either the Good News Translation or the New Jerusalem Bible, which are good modern English translations. If you use the latter, you have to keep in mind that the latter is a Roman Catholic translation and includes the Apocrypha/Deutero-canonical books.
Other translations do not have NOW in Rom 8:1 so stop your twisting! Tyndale Bible of 1526
Ther is then no damnacion to them which are in Christ Iesu which walke not after ye flesshe: but after ye sprete.
Address the greek dx, using old English from 500 years ago is an absurd argument.
Does your Kingdom Interlinear have it?
Many of your erroneous statements (eg. Regarding John 14:14, Rom 8:1, etc.) would not be made if you first consulted your Kingdom Interlinear.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry Your problem is that you lied that it is actually the NWT that made the mistranslation in Rom 8:1 when both Tyndale and the Geneva Bible show no NOW. so you are actually against those Bibles and even Tyndale
@@kevinfromcanada4379 the Sahidic Coptic Text does not have ME in John 14:14, so you are against that Bible text
@@Mr.DC3.1914 So you're saying that your Kingdom Interlinear is wrong for having "me" in John 14:14 and "now" in Romans 8:1. Is that what you're telling me?
Another passage in which the NWT adds to the text is Zechariah 3:2:
Then *the angel of* Jehovah said to Satan: “May Jehovah rebuke you, O Satan, yes, may Jehovah, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this one a burning log snatched out of the fire?”
"the angel of" is not there but the NWT has added it because this is used as evidence of the trinity.
Note: If any JW want's to argue that the NWT has not added to the text, then please show me the word "angel" in either the Hebrew or Greek text-don't say, "Well this version over here supports the NTW," show me from the Hebrew or Greek (Yes, I'll accept the Greek Septuagint).
another LIE from you. Here's how other translations translated zech 3:2 Lamsa Bible
And the angel of the LORD said to Satan, The LORD rebuke you, O Satan; even the LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you. Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
Peshitta Holy Bible Translated
And the Angel of LORD JEHOVAH said to Satan: ”Satan, LORD JEHOVAH shall rebuke you, LORD JEHOVAH who has chosen Jerusalem shall rebuke you! This is a firebrand that was taken out of the fire!”
Good News Translation
The angel of the LORD said to Satan, "May the LORD condemn you, Satan! May the LORD, who loves Jerusalem, condemn you. This man is like a stick snatched from the fire."
And tell how the Sinaiticus text show zech 3:2?
Someone posted something but the post isn't visible. You can confirm by logging out and checking the thread.
Typically it is because it is flagged as spam-posting links is a main cause-or for breaking the community guidelines-saying things that are inappropriate (sometimes using a word deemed abusive).
Please rephrase and re-post and note that this may have happed on other threads.
@@kevinfromcanada4379 Here's how other translations translated zech 3:2 Lamsa Bible
And the angel of the LORD said to Satan, The LORD rebuke you, O Satan; even the LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you. Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
Peshitta Holy Bible Translated
And the Angel of LORD JEHOVAH said to Satan: ”Satan, LORD JEHOVAH shall rebuke you, LORD JEHOVAH who has chosen Jerusalem shall rebuke you! This is a firebrand that was taken out of the fire!”
Good News Translation
The angel of the LORD said to Satan, "May the LORD condemn you, Satan! May the LORD, who loves Jerusalem, condemn you. This man is like a stick snatched from the fire."
And tell how the Sinaiticus text show zech 3:2?
@@Mr.DC3.1914 Did you read my post or do you refuse to be an honest person?
I explicitly said: "show me the word 'angel' in either the Hebrew or Greek text-don't say, 'Well this version over here supports the NTW,' show me from the Hebrew or Greek."
What did you do? You ran to find another translation, just as I said not to do, and avoided the Hebrew text.
Show me the word "angel" in the Hebrew or Greek Text and stop being so incredibly dishonest.
PS. I went and read Sinaiticus myself and guess what... "angel" isn't there. If you want to look at the text yourself, go to codexsinaiticus . org (remove the spaces)
@@Mr.DC3.1914 Did you read my post or do you refuse to be an honest person?
I explicitly said: "show me the word 'angel' in either the Hebrew or Greek text-don't say, 'Well this version over here supports the NTW,' show me from the Hebrew or Greek."
What did you do? You ran to find another translation, just as I said not to do, and avoided the Hebrew text.
Show me the word "angel" in the Hebrew or Greek Text and stop being so incredibly dishonest.
PS. I went and read Sinaiticus myself and guess what... "angel" isn't there. Yes, I looked at a digital photograph of the Greek manuscript. Go see for yourself.
Jesus QUOTED from the OT, which has the name JEHOVAH in there, so for you Jesus DID NOT QUOTE and REMOVED and make changes to the Bible and thus you are making Jesus a sinner. Remember DO NOT ADD OR REMOVE from the Bible
1. Did Jesus sin by using circumlocution in his reply to the high priest, ‘You will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power [τῆς δυνάμεως]’ (Mark 14:62)?[1] Jesus used "Power" instead of the divine name. Did he sin?
2. Did Jesus sin when he cited Isaiah 61:1-2? (Compare the difference between Luke 4:18-19 and Isa 61:1-2).
3. Did Mark sin when he cited Mal 3:1? Mark interpreted it prosopologically as the Father speaking to the Son and changed the words "my face" to "your face" in Mark 1:2. So did he sin in doing that?
The NT writers used the circumlocution Kurios in place of the Hebrew tetragrammaton in the NT. Even Jason BeDuhn, whom JW's love so much, says there is no doubt that the NT never contained the tetragrammaton.
[1] There are several examples of the circumlocution ‘the Power’ in early rabbinic and targumic literature. Rabbi Ishmael (second century ce) is remembered to have said, ‘As it was said to Moses from the mouth of the Power [מפי הגבורה, mippî haggǝbûrâ], “I am the Lord your God . . .”’ (Sipre Num. §112 [on Num 15:31]).
@@kevinfromcanada4379 you are just a BLASPHEMER. Jesus DID NOT SIn. When Jesus QUOTE DIRECTLY from the OT he did QUOTE the scrolls he was reading HONESTLY without changing it. as he said "Again it is written: "
@@kevinfromcanada4379 For you YOU REJECTED what Jesus said in John 17:26 , and you are against Jesus, JESUS MADE KNOWN his Father's name and NOT HIDE it, and his Father's name is JEHOVAH - ISA 63:16
@@Mr.DC3.1914 You didn't answer my questions. You're not being honest.
1. Did Jesus sin by using circumlocution in his reply to the high priest, ‘You will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power [τῆς δυνάμεως]’ (Mark 14:62)?[1] Jesus used "Power" instead of the divine name. Did he sin? *You didn't address the fact that Jesus used circumlocution for the divine name*
2. Did Jesus sin when he cited Isaiah 61:1-2? (Compare the difference between Luke 4:18-19 and Isa 61:1-2). *You obviously didn't compare the two passages.*
3. Did Mark sin when he cited Mal 3:1? Mark interpreted it prosopologically as the Father speaking to the Son and changed the words "my face" to "your face" in Mark 1:2. So did he sin in doing that? *You didn't answer this question.*
The NT writers used the circumlocution Kurios in place of the Hebrew tetragrammaton in the NT. Even Jason BeDuhn, whom JW's love so much, says there is no doubt that the NT never contained the tetragrammaton.
[1] There are several examples of the circumlocution ‘the Power’ in early rabbinic and targumic literature. Rabbi Ishmael (second century ce) is remembered to have said, ‘As it was said to Moses from the mouth of the Power [מפי הגבורה, mippî haggǝbûrâ], “I am the Lord your God . . .”’ (Sipre Num. §112 [on Num 15:31]).
@@kevinfromcanada4379 Jesus used GOD's name and QUOTED the OT correctly, otherwise you are saying that Jesus was a sinner and a liar. See John 17:26. Who is against for the people KNOWING THE NAME of the Father? that's Satan
stop your lies and twisting. Rom 8:1 when both Tyndale and the Geneva Bible show no NOW. so you are actually against those Bibles and even Tyndale. the Sahidic Coptic Text does not have ME in John 14:14, so you are against that Bible text
The beauty of reading Greek, I don’t know to read an old English translation from 500 years ago. Do you think the Tyndale is superior? Are you going to read that instead of the NWT or KJV?
@@LightoverDarkMinistry it just shows that you lied and spreading lies as if the NWT is the one guilty of removing NOW in that verse when other much older translations did the same thing
@@LightoverDarkMinistry of course, GREEK is beautiful language. Now did you research the ORIGINAL greek and hebrew words used here? THE BIBLE teaches that Jesus was MADE As Lord and Christ and as Son (ACTS 2:36, Prov 8, HEB 1:5), CREATED/PRODUCED/INSTALLED (Prov 8) , COME INTO BEING/MADE (Mat 21:42 - egeneto) and GIVEN LIFE by the Father - John 5:26 and it uses TODAY (Heb 1:5), and uses future tenses and is a prophecy in Isa 9:6 (Isa 9:6, - WILL BE) . If you are called MADE AND CREATED AND GIVEN LIFE, and NEVER CALLED in the BIBLE as Creator or Maker , then you are A CREATION. ALL FROM THE BIBLE
From the Lord was this (this is referring to the chief cornerstone who is Jesus) , the word WAS is egeneto (made or came into being) - Matthew 21:42 and the exact Greek word used in John 1:3 - MADE, egeneto (came into being) - JESUS WAS MADE/CAME INTO BEING FROM THE FATHER , yes, Jesus was MADE/CREATED!, See also Acts 2:36, Heb 1:5, 1 john 5
Isa 9:6 the word Prince in the Prince of Peace means PATRON ANGEL also Leader. WHO IS the ONE LEADER that we have? Jesus. Now, that same exact Hebrew word was used for Daniel 12:1 which is used for Michael the Archangel. So are you saying there are MANY LEADERS now?
You're not being honest DX.
You cited Tyndale and Geneva to support the NWT not having "now" in Rom 8:1. Now let's see how consistent you are (I think you're going to demonstrate that you're not consistent). The KJV, Tyndale and Geneva, all have "the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit" in 1 John 5:7. So since these old translations have these words in 1 John 5:7, should they be retained in our translations or should we base our translations on what the best Greek manuscripts say?
Careful now. If you say that we should totally reject 1 John 5:7 because we should be going with the best Greek manuscripts, then you will be demonstrating that you're not being consistent.
What's it going to be DX?
@@kevinfromcanada4379 just because Tyndale and Geneva Bibles disagree with you , and then you attack me and called me dishonest. typical antiJw
Let’s be honest here. The reason most non JW’s reject the NWT it is because it’s translation conveys the true and correct message. Unlike biased translations which eliminate the most important name (YHWH), mistranslate “Gehenna” as “Hell” and more.
That's like saying "The reason people think OJ is guilty is because they hate successful black men" That is a logical fallacy called "Guilt by Association Fallacy". The evidence should prove whether the NWT is a good translation or not. How do you know the NWT is completely without bias?
@Light Over Dark Ministry,
I don’t fully comprehend your analogy, perhaps, because you are using a false equivalence fallacy ? I mean, I provided some examples for non JW’s rejecting the NWT, namely, because it conveys the correct message such as: The Father alone being Almighty God, whose name is Jehovah (in English), Jesus Christ is God’s Son and *not* a member of a trinity, etc.
@@jwdefensor8055 Changing the subject. You didn't address the simple fact that people who don't like the NWT, have discovered due to the evidence, that it's been tampered with. Words not found in manuscripts have been added or remove to realign the Bible to agree with doctrine. It's about evidence, facts over feelings. You're attributing motive because you don't want to address the evidence. Can you respond to the claims made in the video
@Light Over Dark Ministry,
But all translations have added words, which aid the reader in understanding the Bible in its intended language translation. However, the NWT has never obscured what the text is actually saying. I will address your example in the video on my next comment. Please stay tuned.
What a fallacious comment. "Let's be honest"? Inferring, of course, that disagreeing with you is being dishonest. Nice try. Sorry, but no. The reason most JWs don't like this video is because it calls out how completely faulty their translation is. How does that feel? "Unlike biased translations..."? Are you SERIOUS? The NWT was created (not translated) specifically to support JW doctrine that isn't supportable in legit translations. What were the credentials of the translators? Only one of the original team had any training in Greek or Hebrew. But hey, that didn't stop Russell, did it?
"The NWT is by no means an objective rendering of the sacred text into modern English, but is *a biased translation* in which many of the peculiar teachings of the WT are smuggled into the text of the Bible itself." -- Dr. Anthony A. Hoekema.
Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT *"a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible"*
"If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature)
Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."
British scholar H.H. Rowley stated, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not be translated."
"Well, as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had misquoted me in support of their translation." (These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation", Mantey is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation)
Dr. Julius Mantey , author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the NWT "a shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'"
"I have never read any New Testament so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a translation." (Julius Mantey , Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137)
LORD is a title shared by Father and Son.
LORD=Father=Jehovah is false theology, false god, and false theology.
Father and Son are YHWH/LORD.
Christ is Lord.
What you just said was false. So i guess the son of God “Jesus” is gonna pray to Himself ? How are you gonna have the Most High God confused with the son ??
And last time i checked Gods cant die & it is omnipresent meaning it is everywhere. How would Jehovah die
@@ayeitsdayday1471
"For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them."
Mt.18:20
Omnipresent.
Christ came to preach the gospel to the living and the dead. The three days the body of Jesus lay in the tomb, this is what He was doing in the Spirit...
"...being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient in the days of Noah....while the ark was being prepared.."
1.Pet.3:18-20
"They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit."
1.Pet.4:5,6
THE BIBLE teaches that Jesus was MADE As Lord and Christ and as Son (ACTS 2:36, Prov 8, HEB 1:5), CREATED/PRODUCED/INSTALLED (Prov 8) , COME INTO BEING/MADE (Mat 21:42 - egeneto) and GIVEN LIFE by the Father - John 5:26 and it uses TODAY (Heb 1:5), and uses future tenses and is a prophecy in Isa 9:6 (Isa 9:6, - WILL BE) . If you are called MADE AND CREATED AND GIVEN LIFE, and NEVER CALLED in the BIBLE as Creator or Maker , then you are A CREATION. ALL FROM THE BIBLE
From the Lord was this (this is referring to the chief cornerstone who is Jesus) , the word WAS is egeneto (made or came into being) - Matthew 21:42 and the exact Greek word used in John 1:3 - MADE, egeneto (came into being) - JESUS WAS MADE/CAME INTO BEING FROM THE FATHER , yes, Jesus was MADE/CREATED!, See also Acts 2:36, Heb 1:5, 1 john 5
Isa 9:6 the word Prince in the Prince of Peace means PATRON ANGEL also Leader. WHO IS the ONE LEADER that we have? Jesus. Now, that same exact Hebrew word was used for Daniel 12:1 which is used for Michael the Archangel. So are you saying there are MANY LEADERS now?
JESUS IS Lord! His Lordship was MADE - See Acts 2. Who is the Sovereign Lord? He is different from Jesus as mentioned in Acts 4:24, 26, 30
There is no term God of gods or Creator or Maker used for Jesus.Acts 4:24 - who is NOT Jesus and who is called Sovereign Lord - "one accord to God and said: “Sovereign Lord, you are the One who made the heaven and the earth " Who is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from Jesus who is the Anointed and the Sovereign Lord's SERVANT as Acts 4:30 mentioned "through the name of YOUR holy servant Jesus.”" Acts 4:26 - one against Jehovah and against his ANOINTED one.
GOD IS NOT A LITERAL TORTURER. GOD is LOVE. He only gives eternal life to those who exercise faith in him and his Son (John 3:16, John 14:1) and NOT TO WICKED people. The Wicked will VANISH AND WILL BE NO MORE. Psalms 37:20
How many is Jehovah? Trinitarians say there are THREE Jehovah. What does the Bible say? There is ONE JEHOVAH and NOT THREE JEHOVAH. Deut 6:4. - “Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah
WHO IS THE STAR IN NUMBERS 24:17? That is Jesus. It is the same Hebrew word used in Job 38:7 for the morning stars. So as Jesus is called THE BRIGHT morning star (REV 22:16) so also are the other morning stars(angels). So Jesus is the CHIEF Angel with the archangel's voice (1 Thes 4:16). Jesus is called Prince of Peace in Isa 9:6 and the original Hebrew word for Prince means PATRON ANGEL which is the same Hebrew Word used for Michael the archangel in Daniel.
Jesus is the High Priest and the High Priest is NOT GOD himself.
GOD DOES NOT WORSHIP HIMSELF : John 4:22 -You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation begins with the Jews.
Jesus Included himself IN WORSHIPPING THE FATHER. ONLY A CREATION WILL WORSHIP GOD.
If the holy Spirit is a PERSON then now you have MANY PERSONS IN ONE GOD. REV 5:6 - seven eyes, and the eyes mean the seven spirits of God.SO NOW YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL SEVEN PERSONS IN GOD.
Who is the cause of Salvation? Both GOD and the lamb are saviors, Rev 7:9-10, even Jesus needed to be saved by the Father from death as the Father is the SOURCE OF LIFE AND SALVATION , Hebrews 5:7 & John 5:26 - THE FATHER GAVE THE SON LIFE.
Does the Bible called Jesus MADE AND BORN? Yes! JESUS is the Messiah and a CREATION BY GOD! He is called “BORN OF/FROM GOD”. (1 JOHN 5:18) Hebrews 1:5 showed that Jesus was MADE/BORN (orig Greek-gennaw). Also it says "he will become my son" Notice, FUTURE TENSE, WILL, so before that the SON DID NOT EXIST. If you are BORN AND MADE then you are a creation. , Hebrews 1:5 mentions I WILL BECOME HIS FATHER, so Jesus relationship with the Father has a BEGINNING, When ? it was TODAY. TODAY implies a beginning.
When did Jesus become SON? Even before Jesus became human he is called SON , Prov 30:4
Was Jesus GIVEN LIFE?
He is called the firstborn and beginning of the CREATION BY GOD (COL 1, Revelation ) Also john 5:26 mentions that the FATHER GAVE JESUS, THE SON, with LIFE. If Jesus was given LIFE OR EVEN ETERNAL LIFE, then Jesus does not have life or eternal life before those were given to him. Notice, the Father was NOT given life.
JESUS was MADE LORD (ACTS 2:36).JOHN 6:57 - Jesus Said “ I LIVE BEC OF THE FATHER” SO JESUS’ LIFE was dependent on the Father and his SOURCE OF LIFE/Eternal Life IS THE FATHER as John 5:26 states as well. 1john 5:1 - Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born from God,+ and everyone who loves the one who caused to be born loves him who has been born from that one . who is this that HAS BEEN BORN from that one? That is Jesus! 1 John 5:18 - Jesus is called BORN FROM GOD JESUS IS BORN FROM GOD, 1 JOHN 5:18 - We know that everyone who has been born from God does not practice sin, but the one born from God* watches him, and the wicked one cannot take hold of him . WHO is the ONE BORN FROM GOD that watches us and protects us and who does not sin? JESUS CHRIST!
HAS ANYONE SEEN GOD?
NO MAN HAS SEEN GOD and if they see GOD's face THEY WILL DIE. Jesus was seen by many and they didn't DIE so Jesus Is Not The Almighty God. Jesus is called SON even before coming to earth as human. Exo 33:20 states "“You cannot see my face, for no man can see me and live.”" NO MAN CAN SEE ME, notice ME , you think ME IS NOT LITERAL? IT IS LITERAL "ME" WHO IS GOD.
Number 24:17 doesn’t actually say star. It says ruler. Star is a mistranslation. I was wondering why they chose that, but I guess it was to make it theologically consistent?
A lot of these you mentioned are misquotes, but it would take me a long time to go through them all. John because Jesus was G-d. He makes this explicitly clear. Does this mean Jesus was G-d? No. In fact, none of the early apostles talk about him in this way-it’s literally just John. But we would be dishonest to pretend John isn’t using explicit language in referring to Jesus as G-d. The later chapters also refer to him in this way. I personally don’t believe in Jesus at all, but it’s important to be honest about what the books say.
@@emmettdonkeydoodle6230 the Sahidic Coptic Text called Jesus as A god. Jesus is real and is our Lord and CHrist
@@emmettdonkeydoodle6230 A STAR is NOT a minstranslation in Num 24:17 that is JUST PLAIN wrong, your false interpretation. that verse uses the Hebrew word kokab which means a star
@@Mr.DC3.1914 As for the Sahidic Text.. “a god” is not an accurate translation of the Coptic grammar. “G-d” is much more accurate, but it’s not perfect. The actual grammar used better represents “the Word has the same qualities as G-d”.
Team JW on this 😂. You just keep celebrating Christmas when it's been found to not actually be Christ's birthday and other elements of Christendom 😂
You’re a JW?
@@LightoverDarkMinistryYes. I'm not baptized but I plan on getting so with their view on War. I've seen every video against them on RUclips and seen every ex member. Their Bible is free to the public (like God's word should be instead of these Zondervan, Crossway publishing companies trying to make a buck).
@@rorygilmorelove6So why are you watching Apostate Videos
@@nancia24 cuz I've heard everything already lol 😂
Hello! I think you are a bit confused on the Christian view of war, we discourage war and only pray that it may end and for the safety of those within it, but we do not see it as a sin (John 3:14). If the war is just like WW2 as to where the Nazis were threating the world, but if the war is for money and extortion and not to protect your family then stay away from it.
@@rorygilmorelove6