Jehovah's Witnesses Have you ever really given thought to the following?

Jehovah's Witnesses start with the doctrine then alter the translation and interpretation to match it. The scholar that helped them do the NWT translation was dismayed when he saw the final product.

Yes, of course Jehovah's Witnesses have given thought to Zechariah 12:10. But we do not do so in isolation, we do so in context and in harmony with all the rest of the holy Scriptures.

No, God is not saying that he is Jesus Christ in Zechariah 12:10. But what was done to the Son also affected the Father, Who dearly loved his obedient Son. Jesus was Jehovah's representative.

Since it was God who sent Jesus (John 3:16), and Jesus died in obedience to his Father's will, Zechariah 12:10 could rightly be fulfilled by Jesus Christ.

But Jesus himself identified his Father as "the only true God." Jesus did not claim to be God himself. (John 17:3)

Re-examine or Re-think of my faith from questions approximately right here? via Re-questioning i've got confidence which you're attempting to ask if I even have perchance lost self belief or have confidence in my faith and what I even have been taught as a results of fact of a few question or accusation in this internet site. the respond is: no longer in all probability. i do no longer take any questions or any accusations at face fee, the two from Witnesses haters or Witnesses themselves. i'm going to study questions and study them heavily against the Bible if i don't know the solutions. I additionally want to apply historic, contextual, and linguistic info to decide the validity of assertions made in questions, the two for Witnesses and non-Witnesses whether it in order that occurs that various the questions right here directed against Jehovah's Witnesses are the two in step with the two incorrect premises stronger to fake conclusions or are basically straight forward biased, slanted and hate crammed, and not worth of severe attention. whilst on the different hand, i've got seen distinctive questions wherein the Witnesses are truly the sole ones truly attempting to furnish actual info and answer the question, whilst the anti-Witnesses are so busy attacking and insulting the Witnesses and the WBTS, that they supply the effect of being to miss appropriate to the question thoroughly or no longer supply any actual info in any respect. it truly is why I element with the Witnesses. they only have larger high quality solutions and extra info helping their arguments. inspite of the certainty that, getting back on subject remember, I do remember a minimum of a million question that i've got confidence got here from the Greek and Coptic Translator appropriate to the calculations on the date of advent for guy. He reported that for the duration of specific MSS, there have been extra advantageous names extra in some genealogies, which potential guy would desire to be calculated as being over 7000 years previous, particularly of basically 6000. Now that one did make me think of =)

Greetings,

Yes, we have thoroughly examined this text.

Zec.12:10 is a disputed text. This means that the original language manuscripts are in disagreement between whether it should read "me" or "him"/"the one." Using disputed texts goes against the laws of interpretation. Yet Trinitarians must resort to using such disputed texts because they know there is not even a single verse in the Bible which supports their belief.

The reading "they look on him whom they have pierced" is found in many versions such as the RSV, NRSV, NEB, NJB, CEB, NWT, and many others. The reason these versions reject the rendering "me" is because of textual and grammatical rules (See foot notes in NJB, Rotherhams & ASV).

Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar says: "The relative Pronoun. . .This use of ["asher"] is generally rendered in English by HE WHO, HE WHOM, &c. . . In Zec 12:10 also, instead of the unintelligible ["to me whom"], we should probably read ["to him whom]." --pp. 444, 445, 446.

In The New Century Bible Commentary Paul K. Redditt discusses the two readings and says that the NRSV's rendering "look upon the one they pierced" is "the more likely reading."--pp.132, 133. The NRSV reads exactly the same as the NWT here.

In his note on John 19:37 in The Anchor Bible, Raymond Brown wrote: "In the context the "me" ...is strange and the text may well be corrupt, perhaps for accounting for early translator's attempts to improve. Since all the following sentences refer to "him," both scribes (forty-five of the Hebrew mss. collated by Kennicott and De Rossi) and commentators have read "him" for "me."Vol 29A, Geoffrey Chapman, London 1971.

So, as this scholar stated, the context of Zechariah demands that it be speaking of God's servant the messiah and not Jehovah.

Also, it is impossible for this to be speaking of Jehovah since the word for "pierced" here is used for killing a person. And the bible is very explicit when it says: "Surely you, Yahweh, are from ancient times, my holy God, who never dies!"-- Hab.1:12 JER (Dan.6:26; Ps. 90:1, 2 etc.) Saying that this verse is speaking of Jehovah being "pierced" would cause a contradiction in God's Word.

Notice what The New Interpreter's Bible says: "Both translation and interpretation of these verses are difficult...But piercing elsewhere in the O.T. always means physical violence and usually death (e.g., Num. 25:8; 1 Sam 31:4); it does so expressly in 13:3. The mourning described in vv. 10b-12 is mourning ‘for him,' the one pierced or stabbed. It seems preferable to take the MT's object marker before the relative pronoun as indicating an accusative of respect, allowing one to translate "concerning the one whom they pierced" (cf. LXX.)."-Volume 7, p.828.

Even more than this we have what can only be considered irrefutable proof that the best and original reading was "him" and not "me." This is the conclusive evidence found in the inspired quotations of the NT writers. Zechariah 12:10 is used at John 19:37 and Revelation 1:7. Certainly the Apostles knew what the correct reading was and when John quoted Zechariah he knew it was speaking of the messiah as God's servant and NOT Jehovah Himself. So John says "They will look upon HIM who they pierced." So the NT has preserved the original reading for us.

F.F.Bruce commented on how the RSV‘s translation of Zechariah: "The passage is quoted once and echoed once in the New Testament, and in both places the pronoun is not "me" but "him."...It is a reasonable inference that this is the form in which the Evangelist knew the passage...The R.S.V. thus has New Testament authority for its rendering of Zech.12:10"- History of the Bible in English, pp.199,200

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W.Robertson Nicoll comments on John 19:37: "Zech. xii. 10 ...John gives a more accurate translation: OPONTAI EIS ON EZEKENTHSAN: ‘They shall look on Him whom...they pierced'.The same rendering is adopted in the Greek versions of Aquila, Theodotian and Symmachus, and is also found in Ignatius, Ep.Trall., 10; Justin, I. Apol., i.77; and cf. Rev. i.7, and Barnabas, Ep., 7."- Vol.1, p.860

From these standard Greek and Biblical references it is clear that the Witnesses' interpretation is accurate. As always, the NWT proves to render the original text faithfully and in line with recognized definitions and translation principles.

Yours,

BAR-ANERGES

Because whatever they did to Jesus it's if like they were doing it to his Father. The same way what ever they did to Jesus followers it's like if they were doing it to Jesus. John 15:23,24 - Matthew 25:40

Zechariah was written long before the birth of Christ. It's not good practice to compare text written so far apart and assume their object or subject are the same.

In before: "Your translation is wrong." or a pagelong list of contradictory evidence. (Shocking, I know, since the Bible hardly contradicts itself! /sarcasm)