Subject: NWT Rom 10:13

From: Jim West <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 14:12:58 -0500 (EST)

The NWT of Rom 10:13 reads "for all who call on the name of Jehovah shall be
saved". 

There is simply no reason to translate "kurios" as Jehovah.  The numerous
verses in the NT where this is done (as in Rom 10:13) simple prove, to any
reasonable person, that the NWT is motivated not by the text but by a
theologically a priori position.
Further, any suggestion that such a translation is based on the WH edition
of the GNT is verifiably false.

Jim

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Adjunct Professor of Bible, Quartz Hill School of Theology
[email-masked]

---

From: Alan Repurk <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 12:17:41 -0700 (PDT)

> verses in the NT where this is done (as in Rom 10:13) simple prove, to any

Then why does the United Bible Society in their translation of the Greek
scriptures, 1979, translate it to YHWH in Rom 10:13.

> theologically a priori position.

Since you are such a stickler for accuracy in translation perhaps you
could comment on your postion relative the the tetrgrammaton YHWH being
translated into LORD or LORD GOD over 6000 times in the major English
translations of the Hebrew scriptures.

> of the GNT is verifiably false.

Who made this suggestion. ?  Could you provide the complete quote ?

> Jim

Respectfully,
-lars

---

From: "Mr. Helge Evensen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 00:17:45 -0700

> of the GNT is verifiably false.

I seem to recall that the reason for the NWT´s rendering of "kyrios" into 
"Jehovah" is that some times OT passages quoted in the NT in which the 
Hebrew "Jehovah" occur is rendered by the NT author into the Greek 
"kyrios". 

There is no New Testament Greek word which is equivalent to "Jehovah", so 
if Jehovah is to be mentioned in the NT, the NT authors had to use a word 
available in Greek. The question is: Can "kyrios" be equivalent to 
"Jehovah" in those OT quotations in the NT where the Hebrew has 
"Jehovah"?? (The LXX translators obviously thought that Jehovah could be 
rendered "kyrios"!)
But I have not checked all the occurences in the NWT to see if the 
translators have rendered "kyrios" into Jehovah in other instances.

Since the JW deny that _Jesus_ is Jehovah, they try to avoid any 
reference to Him as such. And they seem to use comparatively logical 
methods in order to do this. But they seem to forget that their use of 
Jehovah in the NT sometimes can testify to the Deity of Jesus. For 
instance, in Mark 1:3 the NWT reads: "Prepare the way of Jehovah, YOU 
people, make his roads straight". This is quoting Is.40:3. We know from 
more than one scripture that the main purpose of the ministry of John the 
Baptist was to go before _Jesus_ and prepare his way. 

Many times they have translated the Greek in harmony with their 
doctrines. But in many of those instances they have not _twisted_ the 
_Greek text_, but have just rendered it in _one_ of several *possible* 
ways. For instance, in 2.Pet.1:1 the NWT has: "the righteousness of our 
God and [the] savior Jesus Christ" instead of: "the righteousness of our 
God and savior, Jesus Christ" (NASV). But we can´t say that they have 
*mistranslated* the Greek text here. We may, however, suspect that the 
rendering was motivated by doctrine. (*No* translator, by the way, 
ignores doctrine when he translates. The NASV translators certainly did 
*not*, especially not in this case!).

Of course, some times they _have_ both added to the text and twisted it! 
One example of that is in Colossians chapter one, where they have 
supplied the word "other* in brackets. There´s no excuse for that. But 
*all* translations add things to the text. Another example is in 
Philippians 2:6, where the NWT-translators have twisted the grammar 
slightly, obviously with the intention to weaken the Deity of Jesus: 
"that he should be equal to God" (instead of: "to be equal with God"). In 
their Interlinear they have followed the Greek grammar. This is an 
example of how _slight_ changes in grammar _can_ alter the meaning 
*doctrinally*! (One of the more grave instances of mistranslation for 
doctrinal purposes in the NWT is the rendering of Rev.3:14).

Note also that the whole verse 6 in Philippians 2 is reworded to match 
this rendering. I don´t think it can be demonstrated that the NWT here 
has an _indefensible_ rendering of the Greek, though! I´m sure there may 
be places where _protestant_ translations have similar renderings of 
Greek words and sentences, but maybe not in "doctrinal" passages (unless 
the translators wanted to *strenghten* some conservative doctrine). 
Grammatically speaking many protestant translators may have done the same 
thing several times.

In many instances of translating, the JW may accuse us traditional 
Christians of rendering the Biblical text in a way that is theologically 
favorable to our own traditional doctrines! Many times tha Greek text 
says one thing, and protestant (and Roman Catholic) translation says 
something else. Many texts in the Bible are translated the way they are, 
not because the Hebrew/Greek necessitates it, but because of established 
translation methods and traditional doctrines. I know of at least one 
English translation that has a clearly Calvinistic bias in some passages.

I apologize for this lenghty discussion on the NWT. But I couldn´t hold 
my peace! That´s one of my problems, you see!

-- 
- Mr. Helge Evensen