Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

If you looks at his books, Mohammad in Christianity,Was Jesus Crucified etc etc , if you turn to the second page and look at the name of the authors.My name is in it.It starts with a w and ends with a s.So i am pretty much quoting myself and mr deedat.We as in IPIC have not copyrighted our work, so copyright laws are not a issue here

---

Please provide a link to where we can download the book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

In 2003 Jason David BeDuhn, associate professor of ............

---

Copying and pasting large sections from a book is not a discussion. I have already dealt with many of the points, but you just keep copying and pasting quotes. This is the discussion board. I note that you are not responding to what I am posting and once again just copying and pasting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Hmmm .... did you even read this link? Here are excerpts:

---------------------------------------------
Conclusion

There is no evidence that the NWT Translation Committee possessed the training or skills necessary to produce an English Bible from the original languages. Frederick Franz’s refusal under oath to render Genesis 2:4 from English into Hebrew is suspicious, given that there is no reason a Hebrew scholar qualified to sit on a modern English Bible translation committee would be unable to do so. Ron Rhodes and other writers who have used the Franz cross-examination as evidence that Franz lacked proficiency in Hebrew have done so legitimately. It is Mr. Stafford’s appeal to William LaSor that proves to be – in Mr. Stafford’s own words – “superficial, inaccurate, and misleading.”
-----------------------------------------------

You may want to read the full article.

---

The reason why I provided the link was that what you claim as a fact is indeed disputable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tj3

Copying and pasting large sections from a book is not a discussion. This is the discussion board. I note that you are not responding to what i am posting and once again just copying and pasting.

---

Obviously I posted there, I am not a Christians scholar. I am a student of comparative religion.The aim was to show you that there are Christians scholars who agree with me that the NWT was indeed an accurate translation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

The reason why i provided the link was that what you claim as a fact is indeed disputable.

---

You have failed to refute it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

Obviously i posted there, i am not a Christians scholar. i am a student of comparative religion.The aim was to show you that there are Christians scholars who agree with me that the NWT was indeed an accurate translation

---

Your quotes failed because the few that I took the time to research in fact disagreed with you (i.e. Metzer). Maybe you did not read my response.

Taking quotes out of context proves nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

Please look again at 'In 2003 Jason David BeDuhn.

---

Don't give vague references. Provide a link. But if it is just more of the same, quotes out of context, I am not interested. I'd rather that you take the time to actually discuss and deal with some of the concerns which have been raised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

If i was taking quotes out of context, i would not have posted the link, rather taken what i liked and posted it.The reason why i posted the link was that there is disagreement between the scholars.

---

I have already proven that some of the quotes are out of context.

I am still waiting for the name of a single person on the original NWT translation committee who was qualified to translate Biblical Greek or Hebrew into English.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

I have already posted this above, i guess you are not reading by answers, rather too busy typing your own.Here it is again

In 2003 Jason David BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University in the United States, published a 200-page study of nine of “the Bibles most widely in use in the English-speaking world”. His study examined several passages of Scripture that are controversial, where “bias is most likely to interfere with translation”. For each passage, he compared the Greek text with the renderings of each English translation, and he looked for biased attempts to change the meaning. BeDuhn states that the general public and many Bible scholars assume that the differences in the New World Translation (NW) are due to religious bias on the part of its translators. However, he states: “Most of the differences are due to the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation.” While BeDuhn disagrees with certain renderings of the New World Translation, he says that this version “emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared,” calling it a “remarkably good” translation.[24]

---

Copying and pasting the same old same old does not make it any better the second time. I already dealt with many of these points.

BTW, I notice that your "quotes" are for the most part (if not all) are copied and pasted from a copyright site - Wikipedia.

Now, if you are just going to repeat this same approach, copying and pasting copyrighted material, ignoring concerns and response, then continuing this discussion is a waste of my time.

BeDuhn, Jason D. Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, 2004. Beduhn compared the King James, the (New) Revised Standard, the New International, the New American Bible, the New American Standard Bible, the Amplified Bible, the Living Bible, Today's English and the NWT versions in Matthew 28:9, Phillipians 2:6, Colossians 1:15-20, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 1:8, John 8:58, John 1:1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dare81

Either you are blind or refuse to see, please see the scholars above that say it is an accurate translation but that does not matter right now to you.HAHA.Nice. Bu since you are so hell bend let me quote this then

The New World Translation was produced by the New World Bible Translation Committee. This committee was originally formed some time in or around 1947 and, according to Nathan Knorr, its members had multinational background.[5] The New World Bible Translation Committee requested that the publisher, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, not publish names of its members.[6][7] Former high ranking Watchtower staffers have proposed their identities[8][9], though the Watchtower organization has never confirmed or denied the details.

---

Another quote from a copyrighted website.

You did not answer the question - the names are in fact known.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, do we know who the NWT translators were? The answer is yes, we do know, despite the WBTS' refusal to release the names. Raymond Franz is a former member of the WBTS Governing Body. In his book, Crisis of Conscience, he states that the translation committee consisted of Governing Body members George Gangas, Albert Schroeder, Fredrick Franz, and then WBTS President, Nathan Knorr.

"Fred Franz (Raymond Franz's uncle, who later became WBTS President), however, was the only one with sufficient knowledge of the Bible languages to attempt translation of this kind. He had studied Greek for two years in the University of Cincinnati but was only self-taught in Hebrew" (Crisis of Conscience, 50).
(Source: The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures: The Jehovah's Witnesses Bible - Apologetics - 4Truth.net)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which of these men were qualified to perform this translation?

Closed due to copyright infringement.