Watchtower and the KJV

The KJV and the NWT
 
 The Watchtowers NWT follows suit where the KJV obscures clear references to the deity of Jesus Christ
 
Robert Bowman Jr., in his book, “Why You Should Believe in the Trinity”, mentions two texts out of a list of verses that clearly proclaim Jesus as Jehovah (or Yahweh) God. (1) He lists these two particular verses together because they are constructed in a manner of Greek construction that falls under Granville Sharp’s rule.

The two verses are;
Titus 2:13, “…of our Great god and Savior, Jesus Christ.” and,
2 Peter 1;1, “…the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”

The Greek in these two verses demands that both “God” and “Savior” be attributed to the person of Jesus Christ. A very brief description of this construction is, if two nouns are connected by a copulative “Kai” (and), and the first noun (in this case God) has the article ‘ho’ (the) in front of it but the second noun (in this case savior) does not, then the second noun refers to the same person that the first one does. Both nouns describe the same person.

This is the exact construction of both Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. When applied under Sharp’s full definition this rule has never been known to fail. (2) Robertson, and (3)Dana and Mantley.

Unfortunately, the KJV translators handled these verses in a way that is ambiguous and obscures the obvious connection of the nouns god and savior to one person, Jesus Christ. The KJV translated them in the following manner; Titus 2:13, ..of our Great God and our Savior Jesus Christ. and 2 Peter 1:1, …the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ. This translation allows the reader to separate God from Savior as if they were two different people.

The Watchtower, with a known bias against the discovery of the proclamation of Christ as the Deity in Scripture, adopted the KJV’s translation and then went further to take advantage of it by inserting the article (the) in front of the second noun. An article that clearly does not exist in the Greek. Such a translation is not possible though, as both passages follow the exact construction as the following verses, 2 pet. 1:11, …our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. 2 Pet. 2:20, “…the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,”; 2 Pet. 3:2 “,…The Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”

A.T. Robertson suggest a reason why the KJV team mistranslated this verse. It appears that at the time of the translation there was a very prominent scholar by the name of George B. Winer. He was held in such high esteem that few men dared to buck his findings and views. This Winer was not a witch or a new age person, but he was a anti-trinitarian, who admitted that his reason for interpreting these verses the way he did was not grammatical, but theological. And either out of intimidation or just reluctance to go against the flow of the periods scholarship, the KJV translators may have followed suit. Stranger things have happened in the world of scholarship.

(1) Bowman, Why You Should Believe in the Trinity

(2) Robertson, The Minister and His Greek New Testament, p.62 (3) Dana and Mantley, A Manual of Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p.147 (4) Robertson, ibid, p.66

Advertisements

About notmanynoble

woodcutter from Washington State
This entry was posted in Bible translation and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Watchtower and the KJV

  1. Lance Ponder says:

    Can you tell me if James 1:1 is this way also?

    Like

    • notmanynoble says:

      I’m in the midst of trying to fly to Pittsburgh to see my new grandaughter, and just came off the mountain from “the homeplace” by back pack and sled the ice is so bad…then I have to get to colville than Spokane…and I haven’t got my interlinear w me. lol, but am going to a bible study tonight and I’ll try and check it out. Probably not indentical though because none of my sources mentioned James 1:1 as far as I remember.

      Like

    • notmanynoble says:

      checked it out online and used the textus receptus, and it looks like the article follows the lord Jesus Christ, so it doesn’t lead or follow the first noun but the second, though Im no Greek expert…here is what they had; Iakwbov yeou kai kuriou Ihsou Xristou doulov taiv dwdeka fulaiv taiv en th diaspora xairein.
      so I dont think that this verse is in the same construction as the others…but Im a woodcutter.

      Like

      • Lance Ponder says:

        Thanks for checking into that for me. I thought perhaps it might be an easy one for you, but it looks like you’re like me in that you have to look up resources to figure this stuff out. Thanks again for the help. I published a book a couple of years ago on James and didn’t know about any of this and if it had worked out it would have been a very useful tidbit missed. Still a useful tidbit, tho. 😉

        Like

      • notmanynoble says:

        Actually I’m probably not as knowledgable as you are, that’s why I really appreciate scholars like Bowman and others that are able to explain their arguments and Greek usage in terms that anyone can understand. I also like the availability of the interlinear Greek texts online and all the tools that are available now. I was able to look at James 1:1 in the Textus Receptus, the Byzantine and the Nestles Aland (sp) . And I looked up Titus 2:13 also. Thanks for the good question.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s