Why do Jehovah's Witnesses mistranslate John 1:1?

In 1950, the Watch Tower Society came out with their own translation of the Bible, the New World Translation. Jehovah’s Witnesses are told that this translation is the most accurate, unbiased translation available. The Society claims that the New World Translation Committee was made up of highly trained Greek scholars who did their best to “transmit his [God’s] thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible.” However, when one endeavors to check into the credentials of these translators, one finds that the Society is unwilling to release this information, stating that the Committee desires that all the glory for this translation go to Jehovah God and therefore the translators desire to remain anonymous.

On the surface, this may sound quite noble and honorable; but one may wonder, is this the real reason why they desire to remain anonymous? Over the years, further investigation has revealed who the translators of the New World Translation were, and the facts show that they were totally unqualified for the task of translation. Five of the six Watchtower Governing Body members who were on the Translation Committee had no formal training whatsoever in the Biblical languages. The fifth one, Fred Franz, (former Governing Body member and Watchtower president from 1977-1992) claimed to have some education, but in the Douglas Walsh Trial in Scotland, he gave this testimony under oath:

Tuesday, 23rd November, 1954:

Frederick William Franz, Examined:

Q. Have you also made yourself familiar with Hebrew?

A. Yes....

Q. So that you have a substantial linguistic apparatus at your command?

A. Yes, for use in my biblical work.

Q. I think you are able to read and follow the Bible in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Spanish, Portuguese, German, and French?

A. Yes.

Q. It is the case, is it not, that in 1950 there was prepared and issued what is called the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures?

A. Yes....

Q. I think that it was your duty, was it not, before the issue of that New World Translation by your Society to check that translation for accuracy?

A. That is true.

Q. In light of your studies and in light of your knowledge?

A. That is true.

Q. And did you do so?

A. I did so....

Q. And was it your duty on behalf of the Society to check the translation into English from the original Hebrew of that first volume of the Old Testament Scriptures?

A. Yes....

Q. In so far as translation of the Bible itself is undertaken, are you responsible for that?

A. I have been authorised to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted.

Q. Are the translators members of the Editorial Committee?

A. That is a question which I, as a member of the Board of Directors, am not authorised to disclose....

Q. When did you go to the University?....

Q. Did you graduate?

A. No, I did not....

Q. Had you done any Hebrew in the course of your University work?

A. No, I had not, but in the course of my editorial work, my special research work for the president of the Society, I found it was very necessary to have knowledge of Hebrew, and so I undertook a personal study of that.

ADJOURNED

Wednesday, 24th November, 1954:

Frederick William Franz, Cross Continued:

Q. You, yourself, read and speak Hebrew, do you?

A. I do not speak Hebrew.

Q. You do not?

A. No.

Q. Can you, yourself, translate that into Hebrew?

A. Which?

Q. That fourth verse of the Second Chapter of Genesis? A. You mean here?

Q. Yes?

A. No, I won’t attempt to do that.

— Douglas Walsh Trial, Pursuer’s Proof, 1954, pp. 7-9, 88, 91-92, 102-103

This exercise which Franz was unable to do is something which the average first or second year Hebrew student could have accomplished without any difficulty. Is it any wonder the Society refuses to publicly reveal the people who were involved in the translation of their Bible? Would you put your trust in a doctor who refused to give his credentials? Yet, this is what many Jehovah’s Witnesses are doing when it comes to vital Bible accuracy.

Even Vine's which is a trinitarian reference works admits that "a god was the Word" is the literal translation of John 1:1c The NAS a Catholic translation in it's footnote states that John is not identifying the Word as God, but that the Word has the qualities of God. The Coptic translation which was translated from the Greek into Coptic, approx. 100 years after John wrote his Gospel, translates it 'a god'. This is by people who spoke the living language and not students of the dead language as today. Side point: Psalms 89:20-29 (read the entire context) tells us that David is the firstborn of the line of David leading to the Messiah. It has nothing to do the David being the last born of Jesse. In the line of David it is Jesus who is the highest of rank. David calls Jesus 'my Lord' at Ps 110:1,2. Hebrews 1:3 tells us that Jesus is an image of God. When did image worship become acceptable? Col 1:15 again Jesus is the image of God, when did an image become the real thing? It also tells us that Jesus of creation, thus becoming part of creation, vs 18 tells us that Jesus is over creation. .

We are always happy to use any Bible in our studies with others.

Many after comparing other Bibles have come to realize that the NWT Bible is accurate and the closest thing to the original manuscripts.

We have put God's name back into it's original place over 7000 times.

Not take it out as someone here stated. So that is a lie.

Also, get your facts straight including your spelling.

Brother Knorr's name is spelled like this, not Noor.

The question about why we don't have windows in our Kingdom Halls is old & stupid.

Look up some of the information on yahoo next time, because we have windows just like we have doors. Some of the K.H halls in high crime rate areas may not, or in places where the economy is poor may not. It cuts down on electric, etc...unlike Christendom we don't beg for the offering plate to be filled a dozen times to pay for this or the preachers salary, car, home, etc..

edit: I forgot to mention that some of our Kingdom Halls don't have doors or windows. Places like in Africa or some of the Islands. Due to weather and economy.

If we want to daydream during wonderful Bible talks & discussions by looking out a window we can stay at home. If someone like yourself want to be a window peeping tom then you'll have to go to the big church down the road. By the way why do your churches have stained windows so you can't see in or out? What do you have to hide?

Why does "Vine's Bible Dictionary" state that "the literal translation of John 1:1 is 'a god was the Word'"?

Why is the sentence "Snoopy was dog" improper english?

Why does the "Emphatic Diaglott" in the word for word translation say:

"a god was the Word"?

Ask yourself, can a person be with himself?

The context of John 1:1 does not teach that Jesus is God, but that he is a god or is divine.

Look up theos in Strong's and you will find the term or title can be applied to representatives of God.

.

I am one of J.W.'s and would be happy to answer that question.

Just a quick note on Daniel and Johns answers.

We do not have a founder as some mistakenly believe and we will be happy to clarify that misunderstanding.

Our K.H.'s do not have windows to keep us in the dark but for safety (break in) reasons. Also you will not find stained windows with religious icons (idols) inside our K.H.'s. In other countries some of our K.H.'s do have windows.

With regard to your question.

John 1:1 and the Word was [a] god.

-Bible translations in a language spoken in the earliest centuries of our Common Era were in the Sahidic dialect of Coptic.

*The Anchor Bible Dictionary says: "Since the [Septuagint] and the [Christian Greek Scriptures] were being translated into Coptic during the 3d century CE., the Coptic version is based on [Greek manuscripts] which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant witnesses."

-Sahidic Coptic reflects an understanding of scripture dating from BEFORE the fourth century, which was when the Trinity became official doctrine.

-Coptic grammar is realtively close to English grammar in one important aspect. The earliest transrelatively the Christian Greek scriptures were in Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek in those days, do not have an indefinite article. Coptic however, does.

*Scholar Thomas O. Lambdin, in his work Indroduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: "The use of the Coptic articles, both defiIntroductionefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English."

Research the chester beatty papyri -813 and you will find it to have been written before the 4th century, which again evidences that the coptic indefinite article (a or an) would have been used before the Trinity doctrine became official doctrine.

Hope this helps.

How do you know that it's not YOUR Bible that is mistranslating it?

The first "God" in that verse is preceeded by the word "ton", meaning "the". The second "god" in this verse is not preceeded by "ton", hence "a" is implied.

An accurate translation would read

In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with The God, and the Word was [a] god.

Note that the Word was WITH God.

Because, not doing so, would contradict other scriptures. Every bible translator adds these linking words in as they see fit because the original language omits them and to translate as it is would be very hard for anyone to understand.

The following is just a selection of points that indicate that the word "a" was righfully inserted in this verse.

The bible speaks of God as ALMIGHTY ...Christ is called mighty God never Almighty - there is a vast difference.

Jesus said, "You, the only true God." (John 17:3) At John 20:17 he said to Mary Magdalene: "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." (RS, Catholic edition) At 2 Corinthians 1:3 the apostle Paul confirms this relationship: "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Since Jesus had a God, his Father, he could not at the same time be that God.

The apostle Paul had no reservations about speaking of Jesus and God as distinctly separate: "For us there is one God, the Father, . . . and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ." (1 Corinthians 8:6, JB) The apostle shows the distinction when he mentions "the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels." (1 Timothy 5:21, RS Common Bible) Just as Paul speaks of Jesus and the angels as being distinct from one another in heaven, so too are Jesus and God.

Another point: the Kingdom Hall that I attend has windows wall to wall - 8 in total and very large ones too. In Scotland, we dont have a high rate of burglery so we dont need to build halls with no windows - theres no ulterior motive in not having them LOL

Why do you ask so many questions about Jehovah's Witnesses on Yahoo! Answers? Ironically, the one place where you're sure to find no answers at all.

If you have sincere questions about them, I assure you you're in the wrong place.

Ask THEM.

in answer to a writer below, the members were

bill cetnar,

raymond franz

frederick franz

albert schoder

george dandos

m. schenkel

also mr.noor (president)may have been involved

READ: 1st JOHN 5:7