K.J.V. compared to N.W.T.

[LaSpino3]

K.J.B vs. N.W.T.

I believe that the many inaccurate translations being sold, or handed out are calculated to deceive. Their end product severely dilute, and confuse doctrine, doctrine concerning who Jesus is, and what He represents. The Christian community is in a spiritual war. What we see is the visible, not the invisible. Both Daniel, and Paul had a taste of Spiritual warfare, and its power.

Let's thumb through the New World Translation (N.W.T.) of the Jehovah Witnesses Bible, and compare a few verses with the King James (K.J.B.) They claim their version is superior in every way. So lets test their claims.

I am not expressing my opinion, only relating the information I have found. Each individual can make up there own mind if what follows is any reason to be concerned.

1. K.J.V. John 5:4, "For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had." Compare to,

N.W.T. I can't find the verse, its gone, only the number 4 remains.

2. K.J.B. Matt.17:21, Jesus said, "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting." The disciples were asking Jesus how to cast out a certain type of demon. Compare to,

N.W.T. Again, the verse has been removed, but they did leave us the number 21.

3. K.J.V. Mark 15:28, "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he (Jesus) was numbered with the transgressors." Compare with,

N.W.T. Opps, sorry, only the number 28 remains. It appears that a person can't learn very much with these verses missing.

4. K.J.B. 1 John 5:7, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." Compare to,

N.W.T. "For there are three witness bearers." Well that all the information they have decided to give their readers. I would say it kind of falls short, don't you think?

5. K.J.V. Acts 8:37, Philip came to a eunuch, who had great authority. The eunuch was reading the book Of Isaiah, but could not understand it. Philip then began to explained what was written.

Acts 8:36, Both men see water, and the eunuch asked, "See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? Ver.37, The K.J.V. gives us the answer to the Eunuches question.

Ver.37, "Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he (the eunuch) answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

So what does they N.W.T. say?

Opps, Philips response to the question is gone. Gee, I wander what the Eunuch did?

6. K.J.B. Matt.18:11, Jesus said, "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."

N.W.T. Darn, another verse went missing.

7. K.J.V. reads in Luke 9:56, Jesus said, "For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village."

N.W.T. Every word Jesus spoke is missing, but they did leave, "They went to a different village.

The N.W.T. does not appear up to this point to be superior, what do you think? The above is not my opinion, these are the facts.

Phil LaSpino www.seekfirstwisdom.com

 

[LaSpino3]

Lets look at Phil.2:6.

Phil.2:6, K.J.V. "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."

N.W.T. Phil.2:6, "Who, although he was existing in God's form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God."

They have published two books of translation, The Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures; and the Diaglott.

Both are quoted, published, and considered to be the true translations to their organization.

1. The Interlinear Translation reads concerning this verse, "Who in form of God existing not snatching he considered the to be equal (things) to God, but himself he emptied form of slave having taken, in likeness of men having become;

2. Their Diaglott reads, "Who in a form of God being, not a usurpation meditated the to be like to God, but himself emptied, a form of a slave having taken,"

Well, if that isn't some kind of mumbo jumbo translation, what is? Trying to make sense of that in itself would be a miracle.

What is it that Jesus has to rob? My Answer, nothing, why? Because the Father has given him all power and authority in Heaven, Earth, and under both Earth and Sea.

Who can be in the form of God except God himself? Being in the form of the Father, as the Father, or like the Father, this being where the force of the antithesis or contrast would seem most naturally to be referring; in other words, the form, or likeness of the Divine majesty, and glory of the Father.

What are these contrasts?

The Father is Holy, Blessed, the Light, Life, All in All, the. I Am, Creator, Supreme, etc.

This must be the form that Jesus was said to have, for He contrasts each and every one. He, and only He, can declare the Father. He is the image, and brightness of His Father's glory, Blessed, Holy, Creator, Lord, etc.

Witnesses teach that this verse shows that even though Jesus was in the form of the Father, that he never tried to seize the Fathers power, or take the Father's glory, or something like that.

If you read their version, I agree, but read a K.J.V. and N.I.V. or any other, and see the difference.

First of all, Jesus cannot steal what already belongs to him. Remember, that "God" is a title, and not a proper name. It means, supreme Lord and Father of all. Jesus is the Creator, Col.1:16, John 1:3. Compare to Gen.1:1, "In the beginning God created all things." Jesus is God, the Scriptures tell us so.

Jesus has been appointed by His Father, Lord, King, and Governor of all. He is the Almighty, Rev.1:8, the "Mighty God (el)," Isa 9:6. The everlasting Father, Isa.9:6, etc.

John 5:22, "The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son."

Matt.28:18, Jesus said, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go therefore, and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Here is the Trinity named, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the Witnesses say there is no Trinity.

Acts 10:36, "He is Lord of all." Lord here is, Kurios. It means supreme, Lord, God.

Phil.2:9, "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him (Jesus) and given him a name which is above every name, "

And Jesus is to be worshipped, "Ver.10, "That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth."

Bow in Greek is, kampto. It means to bend. In N.T. spoken only of the knees.

1. As a transitive verb, which expresses action that passes from the agent (the person bowing) to the object (Jesus.) A present participle of sequel, To bend the knee in homage, worship. Dative, or a term applied to the case of nouns which usually follows verbs that express giving, or some act directed to and object, as in to worship someone. Rom.11:4, and Sept. for Heb. 1 K.19:18. Seq. "With," c. acc. Eph.3:14, "I bow my knees."

2. As an Intransitive verb, that expresses action, that is limited to the agent. Every knee shall bow, as bend itself, in homage, worship, sequel to follow, dative, Rom.14:11, quoted from Isa.45:23 where Sept. for Heb. "Bow." Seq. "at,"

Phil.2:10, "At the name of Jesus every knee should bow."

1 Cor.15:27, "The Father hath put all things (of the creation) under his feet.

Eph.1:21-22, "And hath put all things under his (Jesus) feet and gave him to be the head over all things to the church." Everything else is going on to destruction.

My question to them is, what is it that Jesus has to rob? My Answer, nothing, why? Because the Father has given him all power and authority in Heaven, Earth, and under both Earth and Sea.

Phil LaSpino www.seekfirstwisdom.com