Is the New World Translation a valid version of the Bible?
- Thread starter Jack
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
At the beginning, it was a worder, and a worder it was with a God, and the God it was. A worder another
I have no idea what you are saying. Your sentences make no sense.
The gospel of John says: "kai theos én ho logos" - "and the word was God".
This is not a plausible translation.
Major grammatical errors, semantic distortions, misleading article use, wrong order, odd inversions, non-existent words...
Last edited:
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
I agree. I don't understand where MonoBiblical got "worder" from as an alternative transalation of "logos."
I do not understand where he got basically all his wrong translation from. It is not just objectively wrong, it is not even making any sense.
It is correct but implausible. And 'hn' is a 3rd person singular verb. It always needs a subject.
LOGOS is an actual grammatical term in Greek. But it isn't necessarily equivalent to the English 'word'.
It is not correct in any way. You made major errors and twisted it so much that it has nothing to do with the original.
So? The subject is logos.
"kai theos én ho logos" - And the Word was God.
Last edited:
Nonsense. The sentence is "kai theos én ho logos". There is no "it" and you left out the word "logos" completely. And there is no "the God", but "God", there. The definite article is for logos - the Word.
Come on, what are you doing?
Last edited:
The sentence is "kai theos en"; "ho logos" begins the next sentence. The it could be anything and is part of the verb, but the Greek is not the same as our equivalent verb. And there is the highest God. I am using better methods.
Last edited:
Something like this?
En arché én ho logos
kai ho logos én pros ton theon
kai theos én.
Ho logos hútos én en arché pros ton theon.
The subject is still the logos. If you want to say "In the beginning was the Word and The Word was with God and was God. This Word was with God in the beginning", you did not help your case at all... you just separated the sentences differently, but meaning remains the same.
Last edited:
Let us play it your way. "At the start was a word, and a word was with a god, and the God was." YHWH was the worder. Notice how your translation obscures it. I also divided the sentences differently, true.
It helps my case when I know outos means other in a demonstrative sense. I have not found a case where it doesn't mean another or others. "A word another was at the start with a God."
The difficulty of John 1:1-5,14 is underestimated. E.g. John 1:14, "kai ho logo sarx egeneto" ... "And a word the sarx becomes [of him]". The second aorist passive is a present tense that implies non-continuous action. This is one of my own techniques, and I read it the same everywhere that I don't forget.
Wrong right there. There is the definite article in the sentence - ho logos, i.e. "the word".
Also, I am not sure why you used the word "start" instead of "beginning". The English word "start" has a different nuance that does not fit the context and tone of J 1:1. It is not about some sport event. It is a sloppy translation that distorts meaning.
The purpose of a translation is not to present the most awkward combination of individual words, but to present the original message, tone and nuance as faithfully as possible in the other language.
Last edited:
Jesus THE ALMIGHTY!
Revelation 1:8
8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."
Revelation 2:8
8 "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write, 'These things says the First and the Last, who was dead, and came to life:
Revelation 1:8
8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty."
Revelation 2:8
8 "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write, 'These things says the First and the Last, who was dead, and came to life:
It is an indefinite article. It is rarely before human names-- i.e. ονομαι..
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
I don't really know Greek, but isn't the Greek "o" a definite article, the equivalent of the English definite article "the?" A website I looked at had this:
"There are 2 main types of articles in Greek. The Definite (ο, η, το) and the Indefinite (ένας, μία/μια, ένα). Both are used before singular and plural adjectives and nouns."
The claim that “ho logos” is an indefinite article is simply false. In Koine Greek the article ho (ὁ) is the definite article, equivalent to “the.” It never functions as an indefinite marker. Indefiniteness is expressed by the lack of an article.
Last edited:
Then how do human names become definite without the main Greek article, since they don't have it usually. Plural mass nouns which are spelled singular in English have no equivalent in Greek. They are forced into the English by guess games.
As for the indefinite article being ενας or μια; this isn't the way it used in Koine/Biblical Greek. Εις is used, and μια marks a one-time occurrence of a named/noun action. This seems to be Latin in usage. Also, ena seems to be feminine form of eis.
Similar threads
