15 Jun 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf the word has remained the same then it should be translated the same.
No the word has remained the same, we have merely translated it more accurately as our understanding progressed, that our translation has undergone revision is a reflection of our greatness. After all , the term 'do obeisance', has a different meaning now than it had in the middle ages, we dont tend to greet dignitaries with the term, 'your worship', any more, or at least i dont.
15 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by johnnylongwoodyits not that simple, the term worship has narrowed considerably, for as i mentioned, we do not now refer to dignitaries as 'your worship', it has a much more narrowly religious connotation now than it did in the middle ages. If you fail to take this into consideration when you are translating a text, you are misleading your reader into thinking that every salutation, kiss, greeting or prostration is an act of worship.
If the word has remained the same then it should be translated the same.
15 Jun 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you don't think that your organisation changed the translation to accommodate their doctrine by indicating that Jesus did not actually receive worship?
the term is used 58 times in the Christian Greek scriptures, you will tell us why when it comes to Christ it takes on the meaning of an act of worship and in other places simply refers to an eastern salutation, thanks.
15 Jun 13
3 edits
Originally posted by divegeesterthe accurate translation of the Greek term proskuneo depends on context, if you wish to discuss individual instances of it and why it is translated in a particular way then please do so, asserting that we have done so on the basis of religious bias without making a single reference to the text is typical of the kind of unsubstantiated arguments one finds in tabloid newspapers, once again you will state why it is fitting to translate it as, obeisance, bow down in some instances and not others, or at least state why you translate the term as bow down in some instances and then suddenly make it an act of worship in relation to Jesus.
So you don't think that your organisation changed the translation to accommodate their doctrine by indicating that Jesus did not actually receive worship?
This is the third asking and it seems you cannot tell the difference , one wonders then how you have come to the conclusion that we did so out of religious bias, in fact, how did you come to that conclusion based on an evaluation of the text, or was it perhaps that you simply read about it from some other source, most likely.
Perhaps you would like to comment on Matthew 18:26?
Matthew 18:26
King James Version (KJV)
The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
Matthew 18:26
New King James Version (NKJV)
The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’
why have the translators changed the text, religious bias?
15 Jun 13
"SUMMARY OF KING JAMES BIBLE STATISTICS":
Total Books - 66 Total Chapters 1,189 Total Verses 31,102
"Total words in the 31,102 verses - 788,258 (not including the Hebrew Alphabet in Psalm 119 or the superscriptions listed in some of the Psalms)" http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.html
10) "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." 1 Timothy 2:5-6 (KJV)
11) "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." John 1:12 (KJV)
12) "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV)
13) "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3:3 (KJV)
14) "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." John 5:24 (KJV)
15) "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?" John 11:25-26 (KJV)
16) "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Revelation 20:15 (KJV)
17) "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." Romans 8:1-2 (KJV)
18) "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Galatians 3:26 (KJV)
19) "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." John 10:28 (KJV)
20) "For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 8:38-39 (KJV)
Note: Once you have believed in Christ, your new relationship is permanent and eternal. The Perfection of God's Character guarantees your relationship. His Immutabily provides the ultimate security: God's unconditional promise of eternal life.
(page two)
15 Jun 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRobbie, do you or do you not think that the JW organisation changed the 1971 translation of the word for worship in order to fit their doctrine by indicating that Jesus did not receive worship?
the accurate translation of the Greek term proskuneo depends on context, if you wish to discuss individual instances of it and why it is translated in a particular way then please do so, asserting that we have done so on the basis of religious bias without making a single reference to the text is typical of the kind of unsubstantiated arguments one f ...[text shortened]... with me, and I will pay you all.’
why have the translators changed the text, religious bias?
15 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterWe did not believe that Jesus was God in 1871 never mind 1971, your assertions are therefore quite ludicrous and as usual baseless. Piece of advice, learn to think for yourself rather than spewing out stuff gleaned from hate sites, it may save you from continually looking like a tool.
Robbie, do you or do you not think that the JW organisation changed the 1971 translation of the word for worship in order to fit their doctrine by indicating that Jesus did not receive worship?
15 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm not making an assertion, neither am I asking you what the JWs believed in 1871. I'm asking you if you think the JW organisation changed the 1971 translation of the word for "worship" in their bible in order to align that version with their doctrine? It's a simple question robbie, why can't you answer it?
We did not believe that Jesus was God in 1871 never mind 1971, your assertions are therefore quite ludicrous and as usual baseless. Piece of advice, learn to think for yourself rather than spewing out stuff gleaned from hate sites, it may save you from continually looking like a tool.
15 Jun 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe question is not what you believed and when you believed it. The question has to do with changing the original NWT by the second edition to agree with Watchtower dogma.
We did not believe that Jesus was God in 1871 never mind 1971, your assertions are therefore quite ludicrous and as usual baseless. Piece of advice, learn to think for yourself rather than spewing out stuff gleaned from hate sites, it may save you from continually looking like a tool.
The Instructor
15 Jun 13
Originally posted by divegeesterif they had done so, why had they not done so in an earlier version, after all they believed that Jesus was not God in 1947, 1951 and 1983, your assertion therefore that they suddenly did it in 1971 to perpetuate the belief that Jesus is not God or is not to be worship is ludicrous. We never worshiped Christ in the 1870s, so the answer is NO, do you understand, i do not believe it to be the case. Is that clear enough and until you provide some evidence to the contrary instead of your usual ludicrous assertions the answer will remain NO, do you understand?
I'm not making an assertion, neither am I asking you what the JWs believed in 1871. I'm asking you if you think the JW organisation changed the 1971 translation of the word for "worship" in their bible in order to align that version with their doctrine? It's a simple question robbie, why can't you answer it?
15 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeestershut up you hypocrite, you called out Bobby for being the biggest troll on the site when he is in fact perfectly amicable and about the least contentious contributor I know, look at yourself for a change instead of constantly pointing the finger at other people.
Your abuse means nothing to me robbie, but is very revealing of your nature and spirit.
15 Jun 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRussell taught that we should worship Jesus and the initial Watchtower Charter's specified that establishment of the Watchtower Society was to promote the worship of Jehovah and Jesus. Yet since the 1950's, worshipping Jesus became regarded as wrongful idolatry.
if they had done so, why had they not done so in an earlier version, after all they believed that Jesus was not God in 1947, 1951 and 1983, your assertion therefore that they suddenly did it in 1971 to perpetuate the belief that Jesus is not God or is not to be worship is ludicrous. We never worshiped Christ in the 1870s, so the answer is NO, do you ...[text shortened]... ontrary instead of your usual ludicrous assertions the answer will remain NO, do you understand?
Russell promoted the worship of Jesus and prayer to him because he is our God.
"It seems clear that His Divinity was retained in humanity because He repeatedly spoke of Himself as having come down from heaven, and because He, though passing through trial and sorrow as a man, was yet possessed of the authority and exercised the prerogatives of a God. He was the object of unreproved worship even when a babe, by the wise men who came to see the new-born King. Matt. 2:2-11. Even the angels delighted to do Him honor. "When He bringeth the first-begotten into the world, He saith, "And let all the angels of God worship Him." Heb. 1:6. He never reproved any one for acts of worship offered to Himself, but when Cornelius offered such service to Peter--the leading apostle-- "he took him up, saying, stand up; I myself also am a man." .... Had Christ not been more than a man the same reason would have prevented from receiving worship...." Zion's Watch Tower 1880 Oct pp.2-3
"It is undoubtedly proper enough for us to address petitions to our Redeemer and Advocate, who loved us and gave himself for us....Although we are nowhere instructed to make petitions to him, it evidently could not be improper so to do; for such a course is nowhere prohibited, and the disciples worshiped him." Zion's Watch Tower 1892 May 15 p.157
"Question. The fact that our Lord received worship is claimed by some to be an evidence that while on earth he was God the Father disguised in a body of flesh and not really a man. Was he really worshiped, or is the translation faulty? Answer. Yes, we believe our Lord Jesus while on earth was really worshiped, and properly so. It was proper for our Lord to receive worship in view of his having been the only begotten of the Father and his agent in the creation of all things, including man." Zion's Watch Tower 1898 Jul 15 p.216
"In one respect many of Christendom could learn numerous important lessons from these wise Gentiles....They worshiped him in three senses of the word: They fell before him, prostrated themselves, thus physically expressing their reverence. They worshiped him in their hearts and with the tongue gave expression to their rejoicing and confidence. They opened their treasure-box and presented to him three gifts appropriate to royalty: the myrrh representing submission, frankincense representing praise, gold representing obedience." Zion's Watch Tower 1906 Jan 1 p.15
Rutherford continued this teaching.
"Jehovah God commands all to worship Christ Jesus because Christ Jesus is the express image of his Father, Jehovah, and because he is the Executive Officer of Jehovah always carrying out Jehovah's purpose (Heb.:3-6)." Watchtower 1939 Nov. 15 p.339
"During the Millennium, "the princes will lead the people in their worship of Jehovah and of Christ." Vindication Volume 3 p.295
"The people of all nations who obtain salvation must come to the house of the Lord to worship there; that is to say, they must believe on and worship Jehovah God and the Lord Jesus Christ, his chief instrument (Philippians 2:10, 11)." Salvation p.151
Knorr continued to teach we should worship Jesus and the 1940's Watchtower articles still stated that Jesus was to be worshipped.
"Now, at Christ's coming to reign as king in Jehovah's capital organization Zion, to bring in a righteous new world, Jehovah makes him infinitely higher than the godly angels or messengers and accordingly commands them to worship him. Since Jehovah God now reigns as King by means of his capital organization Zion, then whosoever would worship Him must also worship and bow down to Jehovah's Chief One in that capital organization, namely, Christ Jesus, his Co-regent on the throne of The Theocracy." Watchtower 1945 Oct 15 p.313
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/worship-jesus.php
The Instructor
15 Jun 13
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsso what, we have rid ourselves of the last vestiges of idolatry. Both Russell and Rutherford are only men, we dont worship what they say or did and many of their ideas have been discarded when new understanding has arisen, pity you could not do the same but statued cling to doctrines from the forth century. So it was in the 1950's so what.
Russell taught that we should worship Jesus and the initial Watchtower Charter's specified that establishment of the Watchtower Society was to promote the worship of Jehovah and Jesus. Yet since the 1950's, worshipping Jesus became regarded as wrongful idolatry.
Russell promoted the worship of Jesus and prayer to him because he is our God.
"It seems www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/worship-jesus.php
The Instructor
(Matthew 4:10, 11) . . .Then Jesus said to him: “Go away, Satan! For it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”  Then the Devil left him, and, look! angels came and began to minister . . .
15 Jun 13
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy do you have to be so abusive? All I'm doing is asking you a question about your organisations translation of their bible, why is it such an aggravation to you and why can't you just answer the question?
shut up you hypocrite, you called out Bobby for being the biggest troll on the site when he is in fact perfectly amicable and about the least contentious contributor I know, look at yourself for a change instead of constantly pointing the finger at other people.
I'm just asking you if you think the JW organisation changed the 1971 translation of the word for "worship" in their bible in order to align that version with their doctrine?