Why don't those who can read and speak these languages as well as english, confront the translators with errors they find in The New World Translation of the Bible?\nIs it because there aren't any?\nScholars who have actually done the translating worked very hard to make sure there were non.
218478
First of all, no one speaks ancient Greek or Hebrew anymore, so there will always be some debate to translation.  \n\nSecond, the translators of the New World Translation are all Jehovah's Witnesses.  Part of the belief system of the Jehovah Witnesses (and part of what makes it a cult) is that if any non-JW tries to convince you of anything they are "from the devil, and should not be listened to."  So it isn't that they haven't told the translators about the errors, it is that the translators don't listen.  \n\nThird, the "scholars" you speak of don't have the qualifications to translate the Bible.  They use their ideology, not their intellect to make the statement that there are "no errors."\n\nFourth, if the "scholars" were doing such a great job of translating, why don't all the other scholars who study ancient Greek and Hebrew come up with at least SOME of the same conclusions, in fact why do ALL of them disagree?\n\nFifth, if the New World Translation has no errors, why can a simple Greek student like myself find errors?  If you believe the New World Translation has no errors, you have never taken Greek!\n\nSixth, Scholars who have actually done the translating on every translation (with a few exceptions where ideology got in the way, like the NWT) have worked very hard to make sure there were no translation errors, so your argument is invalid.\n\n\nBTW - Translating error - John 1:1, if it should be translated "the Word was a God" because of the lack of a definite article before the word translated God (here the word is Theos), you had better insert the word "a" before God in verses 6,12, and 18 of the same chapter to read, "There arose a man that was sent forth as a representative of a god," "...to them he gave authority to become a god's children," and, "No man has seen a god at any time," for there is no definite article in front of God in any of these verses, either.  If you don't believe me, look it up.
124336
You missed the biggest point of all, Man wrote the Bible, It has lost and been added to over thousands of years in translating the bible. God himself is perfect, his Creation's just got a little lop sided is all.
173221
How long do you think it will be before a person or group successfully reassembles the bible to include recently discovered religious texts that they feel better suit modern times?\n\nNever.  For all practical purposes, the Bible as now been “set in stone.”\n\nWhat do you think about this?\n\nI believe that those who tend to be the loudest on this topic have either done the least amount of study or have very extensive time invested in their current belief.  Most claim as articles of fact pieces of information which are not true.  Less than one in one billion (if any) could give me that actual names of the men who met to determine which books and works were included in either Testament.  Yet they propose that these men were inspired by G-d to make these choices for all time.  They are seem to ignore that most works which were not included were systematically searched for and burned as heretical.  The mere fact that any remain after 2000 years is a miracle.\n\nWhat will the cultural/spiritual ramifications of this be?\n\nA continuation of our current position.  As beautiful as the KJV is to read, it is flawed.  This fact has been shown over and over again by scholars who do know the languages involved.  Yet look at the number of supporters that it has.  The sad part of this is that many who claim to understand the meaning of the KJV of the Bible (which is a very serious and metaphysical work) do not understand and cannot follow a simple Shakespearean play (which is light entertainment) that was written at about the same time.  What does this yell you about the ignorance of humans?  And ignorance is bliss.\n\nIf God is really solely responsible for the bible's contents why does he have hundreds of millions of Christians using different versions?  And how would a new version be any worse?\n\nThose humans who claim to be privileged to the plans or purposes of Divinity are deluded.  No human has that capability.  Only Divinity is perfect.  Humanity is arrogant, not understanding that the message is important, not the delivery of the message.  Those that must quote scripture for every answer (especially those claiming that it is the Word of G-d) are probably idolaters.  They have worshipped the written word instead of Divinity.  Each believing that they are right and all others wrong.  They are the cause of the fragmentation of the Church and people like them are usually too stubborn to see their own sins.\n\nA new version of the Bible is not needed.  These recently discovered and translated works should be made available to the widest reading audience for study and debate.  At least by those who are capable of understanding that Humanity did not have the message right then and still is lacking in understanding.  This is human nature.  Divinity is the only proper judge; and Divine Judgment, unlike human opinion and understanding, IS perfect.
131677
Yes.. I read some of the link, but I have studied the JW's so much that I may know more about them than they do.  The false translation of their Bible, and many others.  The poor people have been decieved and just don't know it.  I spent enough time with one of their teachers that he almost converted as he could see that I had the answers that he didn't.
92500
We cannot really argue who Jesus was according to the Bible, because of the agreed lack of a process of authentic transmission. Can we really put our faith into an English translation of a Greek/Latin translation of another translation of another translation of Aramaic/Hebrew/Syriac writings of Hellenistic Jews who never met Jesus and, according to the Bible actually fought against the Original Disciples and their teachings? Even the sincere men who put together the most accurate translation to date (NIV) say that we still know very little about Jesus. \n\nHence as much as it is great to see passion in believing in Jesus, I hope that we can be sincere enough to review our beliefs for the sake of God. May God guide us all.
473610
True, and it is what I've been saying all along. When I was a Christian, I still didn't believe in the letters of Paul. Was it not the prophets of the ancient times that brought laws and the word of G-d through revelation (ie. a burning bush, the direct voice of G-d)? Then years later, the "new" testament is revealed through letters and secondary sources written by people who weren't even there.  Another great point, thanks for the question.
334454
I have read some in translation.\n\n"If so, what is your opinion on the similarities between them and the Bible?"\n\nClearly the authors of the Bible drew upon a stock of pre-existing stories and oral traditions in order to express their theological views.
390729
It's so funny to me that in your first question people said there were no contradictions and asked you to name some.  When you DID name some they say it screwed up translation.  Good job.
43029
Don't Muslims say that the Koran has to be read in Arabic and that translations don't count?\n\nThat may be a reason.
459099
Sorry, I disagre with you.\n\nThe "Living Bible" is the most horrible translation I've ever seen.\n\nWhen I compared 8 texts I quickly threw the "Living Bible" out of the equation as just bring too off from the rest of the texts I was reading.\n\nAlso, have you studied Ancient Greek and Anceint Hebrew and looked at the scroll and Codex yourself!\n\nDo you AGREE with all the translators!\n\nIf the Quran shows us anything, it shows us how three different translators can't agree on the ancient texts!\n\nThey sometimes come close, but they don't fully agree with all the phrasings.\n\nI'd say the Judeo-Christain Bible can easily fall into the same conflicts!\n\nI came up with a ficitious Diary entry of a Girl in the late 1960s or early 1970s.\n\n"We went to the Dead show at Winterland and had a bitchen time!"\n\nNow, you translate that!\n\nLet's see just how well you know your 1970's trivia!\n\nTELL ME exactly What she said and meant.  DEFINE every word and phrase.\n\nI know the answers, but only Dead-Heads can translate that.\n\nNow, what do you do in 500 years!\n\nThe same exact thing applies to the Bible and Quran!\n\nYou sort of have to be there to know what was REALLY meant!
241029
I think most people have read both Testaments and understand them both.\nI don't think the asking of controversial questions on either of the bibles is a "challenge" it is merely a way of trying to dampen down the pontificaters and religious fanatics that often spout a load of garbage.\nIt won't work of course, but I enjoy trying!
650605
Well yeah, kinda, but it was originally written in Hebrew, Greek, and a little Aramaic.\n\nEach time someone makes a new translation they do not use exactly the same English words. This is where most of the confusion comes from. There are some words we don't have an English word for-in that case several English words are used to get the meaning of the original. \n\nThere are some who believe in the 'double' inspiration of the KJV. This also causes problems when other translations don't exactly line up with the KJV.\n\nThere is about a little less that 1/2% discrepancy in all the text. No Biblical doctrine is affected. Any good translation id safe.\nKJV, NKJV, NIV, CSB, NAS, NASB,  all good. Some are easier to read than others, some are more word for word, some are more thought for thought.
106757
Your question also begs a more basic question:  regardless of version, timing, or translation, human beings wrote the contents of, and chose and assembled, the texts that were called The Bible.  (Same with the Talmud, and the Koran.)  So it's reasonable to ask, why do so many believe it to be God's word?  I mean, it could be.  But why do people today so strongly believe it to be so, with such certainty?  When all they have is other people's word for it?  It is indeed remarkable, and hard to understand.
570750
There are many different translations of the Bible. Some things were left out while others were manufactured. As for my language only having 10 words, I don't think the word "computer" would be a part of it.
343098
because, except for in recent times, jews have always been able to read hebrew. we don't rely on english translations, especially english translations by christian leaders with an agenda who have so obviously deliberately mistranslated and distorted the hebrew scriptures in order to make jesus "fit" into the hebrew bible that jews can't help but laugh
593615
I agree that it is out of date, but I don't think that you can just go and arbitrarily change the content.  And by whose standards would it change?\n\nI think that there are many misinterpretations of the bible over the centuries.\n\nI am going to be ordering one that is supposed to be a direct translation from the orginal Aramaic New Testament to see what the difference is.  It is called The Modern New Testament : Translated from the Original Aramaic Sources by G. Lamsa.\n\nHaving said that, I also think that much of the bible directly speaks to that generation's society and political culture and therefore, not a lot of it has to do with how things are in this day and age, although I feel that Jesus taught us timeless lessons of love and acceptance and faith.  \n\nBut I don't believe that Jesus was the only master and that timeless lessons were taught by Mohammed and Buddha and many other masters as well.
528032
I have more than one translation...and using the concordance is always a good idea.\n\nThanks for pointing that out. \n\n:o)