Does the NWT Live Up to Its Own Standards?

Comment by Truth-Seeker on 2017-05-04 00:07:39

From a pratical point of view, I'm ok with the passing and not the eating. I wouldn't like to eat of bread passed through dozens of hands or drink from a cup passed through dozens of lips. I think the Catholic church had this sanitary issue before.
To commemorate is to 'call into mind', which is the most important thing in the first place, not the eating. They didn't know anything about germs in the first century.

• Reply by Mowani on 2017-05-04 05:25:51

  Given the fact that first century christian met in private homes, in small numbers, I do not see a problem in sharing a cup of wine as it was done by Jesus and his disciples.

  • Reply by Truth-Seeker on 2017-05-05 00:19:16

    I like the idea of small groups, too. Nobody gets neglected. The Book Study was my favorite meeting when I started my journey.

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-05-04 08:10:25

  Actually, by such sharing, which was typical of all meals back then, they shared germs and so built up antibodies. In our Lysal sprayed anticeptic society, we have often weakened the immune system of our body by not exposing it to foreign bacteria so that it can learn to build up a natural resistance.

  • Reply by Truth-Seeker on 2017-05-05 00:17:06

    Yes,I like that sharing of meals aspect as part of early Christian fellowship.

• Reply by Nicodemus on 2017-05-04 18:22:40

  What did Jesus mean by 'this' when he said 'keep doing this'?

Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2017-05-04 05:54:47

Well done Apollos and Alex Rover. Really appreciated the article. You have highlighted (not for the first time) a practice which can really stumble a serious student of the scriptures. Twisting to support a belief or practice is why many of us are here.
Another one is Micah 6:8, where cherish loyalty is substituted for love loyal love (see the footnote) or love kindness (older NWT). Querying this, I was referred to the footnote. But how was loyalty used in the Watchtower and the conventions last year ? It is a cold word, and has little to do with the real personal meaning of Micah 6:8.
it will be interesting to hear from others to discover other verses where the NWT has done something similar.
All this goes along with the practice of putting ellipsis (dots) to leave out the full meaning of quotations, or the name of the person being quoted.
How can you call something the truth if you are not bothered whether what you are saying is true.

• Reply by Nicodemus on 2017-05-04 18:22:04

  1 Pet 1:11 is another good example.

  • Reply by Leonardo Josephus on 2017-05-05 05:32:31

    Hi Nicodemus. Can you elaborate on 1 Peter 1:11 ?

    • Reply by Nicodemus on 2017-05-05 10:27:04

      It appears to teach that the Spirit of Christ is responsible for the inspiration of scripture. This contradicts WT doctrine, so the verse is changed.
      
      Compare Romans 8:9-11 Kingdom interlinear

• Reply by John S on 2017-05-05 06:30:59

  From the Kingdom Interlinear Bible WT printed in 1969, I learned everywhere the Bible describes God or Christ coming into our bodies via the spirit, WT has translated, "in union with"....IMPLYING a mental agreement, not physical/spiritual anointing, adoption, rebirth at all. This is heinous. From the wicked one. Purposeful with intent to destroy the true hope Jesus lays out for Christians. (John 3:5)

  • Reply by Menrov on 2017-05-05 15:51:19

    For those interested in another striking variance in the NWT compared to about all other translations, see John 1:4.

Comment by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-05-04 16:51:49

Point taken about the Greek , the whole ritual at the Jws memorial makes no sense at all, why would anyone actually pass a cup of wine to a person and yet bar them from drinking it , and pass a piece of bread to them and expect them to not eat it . What's the use of even turning up if your not going to partake , I know if I had invited someone to a meal and they refused to eat anything , I would feel insulted

• Reply by Nicodemus on 2017-05-04 18:23:14

  They are offered the body and blood of Christ and they reject it... very sad

Comment by John S on 2017-05-04 18:27:48

"For as often as you EAT this loaf, and DRINK this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord until he arrives." 1 Cor. 11:26 NWT

Here is Wescott and Hort's Greek Interlinear, the basis of WT 'translation'...

Paul says, "I, for I received beside from the Lord, which also I gave beside to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night to which he was being given beside, he received loaf, and after giving thanks he broke and he said This of me is the body the over you; this be you doing into the my remembrance.

As thus also the cup after the to have supper, saying This the cup the new covenant is in the my blood; this be you doing, as often as if ever you may be drinking, into the my remembrance.

As often as for if ever you may be eating the loaf this and the cup you may be drinking, the death of the Lord you are announcing down, until which he should come." 1 Cor. 11:23-26 Kingdom Interlinear printed by WT 1969 ( we all were encouraged to get a copy, 500,000 copies were printed)

Comment by wild olive on 2017-05-04 23:38:27

Fine job by Apollos and Alex,I really wish I could read Greek,a goal to achieve perhaps.
I can't help but feel,considering this article and the many others on this site that have touched on this issue of non partaking by the attendees of the memorial,that it is actually the desire and goal of the GB to phase out the "heavenly calling".
Considering that Rev7:1-3 says that the whole reason the angels are holding back the 4 winds of destruction,is to seal spiritual Israel,knowing this,you would think that it would be priority one for the true religion to be seeking out these ones who make up the new Israel,instead there is a determined effort to deflect away any discussion,teaching or encouragement from these ones,IMO this speaks volumes of the real intent.

Comment by Menrov on 2017-05-05 04:22:35

When a translation is made, the translator(s) has to consciously make choices. In particular where a word can have more than one meaning or where a word does not have a clear matching word in the target language. However, in this case there is a good word or words available and the words have basically similar meanings: distribute or divide. If one distributes or divides something, all recipients receive a part TO KEEP. Why would one otherwise distribute or divide.
The translator(s) of the 2013 NWT consciously deviated from the standard words and choose a word that does not represented the original word nor its meaning. That is a conscious decision.
Now, the new word used, PASS, also means now, according to WT doctrine, that the participants in Luke 22 did not drink but only passed the glass. So, none of them partook.
Again, this choice of the word PASS, is a conscious decision.
I can only come up with word word for this: creepy.

• Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-05-05 15:16:06

  Menrov you say that , according to watchtower doctrine that the participants in luke 22 did not drink but only passed the glass , I've not read the watchtower consistently for a while , but if this is true , I find the interpretation wildly inaccurate , for were those not in attendance the actual 12 disciples of jesus .

  • Reply by Menrov on 2017-05-05 15:40:59

    Hi, my point is, the WT has always taught that the 12 present did eat and did drink. However, now that they use the word PASS, they are actually saying that the 12 did NOT drink just PASSED the glass.

    • Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-05-05 16:47:56

      So it seems that they are using a verse that describes the partaking of the bread and wine , to justify the abstaining of it . Sorry mate , I must be a bit slow on the uptake , just can't seem to get my head around it , hence my name

      • Reply by leaving_quietly on 2017-05-06 11:28:01

        They don't actively justify it with this verse. It's is an abnormality, however, and a very strange translation choice. Why it's in there as "pass" without any reference whatsoever to the tradition JWs have of passing the bread and wine is really anyone's guess.

• Reply by John S on 2017-05-05 06:25:27

  I'll add my word: Satanic

Comment by leaving_quietly on 2017-05-06 11:23:25

It is very noteworthy that the verses used at the Memorial celebration of JWs are these verses in Luke 22:19,20. Typically, this verse 17 is not read, but anyone there may glance up and see it. In all my years of attending, I can't recall when Luke 19 was NOT used. Why is that? Perhaps because Matthew 26:26,27 says, "Take, eat" and "Drink out of it, all of you." And Mark 14:23 says regarding the cup, "and they all drank out of it." Luke 19 does not have this detail.

That said, no JW would ever say they didn't drink. That is not taught. But the choice of verses subtly shys away from that detail. Maybe we're making a bigger deal of this than it is, but I can think of no other reason for using the word "pass", which is not even a valid translation choice, than to push forward a particular doctrine. Mind you, I've never heard any JW refer to verse 18 and say, "See? The Bible says they passed it."

Comment by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-05-07 04:12:39

I have to ask have the watchtower actually quoted this verse in support of just passing the emblems around rather than partaking or is the fact that they are just quietly giving the impression by mistranslating the word ?

• Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-05-07 08:19:43

  I found these references:
  
  *** w03 2/15 p. 16 par. 19 Why Observe the Lord’s Evening Meal? ***
  Using just “a cup,” not several cups, posed no problem, since on that occasion only 11 partakers were apparently at a single table and could readily pass the cup from one to another.
  
  *** w90 6/15 p. 8 Humility at the Last Passover ***
  Traditionally, four cups of wine are drunk by Passover participants. After accepting what is evidently the third cup, Jesus gives thanks and says: “Take this and pass it from one to the other among yourselves; for I tell you, From now on I will not drink again from the product of the vine until the kingdom of God arrives.”
  
  *** w78 3/1 p. 8 Memorializing Christ’s Death—How Much Longer? ***
  And, accepting a cup, he gave thanks and said: ‘Take this and pass it from one to the other among yourselves; for I tell you, From now on I will not drink again from the product of the vine until the kingdom of God arrives.’
  “Also, he took a loaf, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to them, saying: ‘This means my body which is to be given in your behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.’ Also, the cup in the same way after they had the evening meal, he saying: ‘This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in your behalf.’”—Luke 22:14-20.
  The two cups of wine that Jesus used, according to the above account, were the last two of four cups of wine that were traditionally drunk by all sharers in the Passover during the first century C.E. So they were cups Nos. 3 and 4. Cup No. 3 was drunk after the celebrators had eaten the Passover lamb and the unleavened bread. It was called “the cup of blessing” because of the blessing pronounced over it. (1 Cor. 10:16) Jesus “gave thanks” to God for the cup before sharing it with the apostles. Thus Jesus led in celebrating the Passover according to the accepted custom of the time. He did not alter or interrupt it by introducing anything new into the observance. In this way he kept the Law as a born Jew.
  
  The Organization doesn't directly use Luke 22:17 to prove that the cup should be passed. That might draw attention to the biased translation. They don't need to prove anything really. They've established a tradition of passing. I've gone to over 60 memorials in my life and since I was a kid, the cup was passed. So when I read Luke 22:17, it simply reinforced the visual. I would have never thought to question the validity of the translation because it fit with the tradition which I'd come to accept as scriptural since infancy when I accepted all things trustingly. Had it not been for the research of Apollos and Alex, I would still believe the cup was passed.

  • Reply by Ifionlyhadabrain on 2017-05-08 04:56:33

    Ok thanks meleti

Comment by lazarus on 2017-05-07 18:41:30

Good Research and pick up! Consistency is the Key, one would have to ask why in Luke a change of word-pass, which seems inconsistent To the rest of bible verses were the same word applies. That would be a question for the Translating Committee of the NWT to answer. Well, I don't think any of them are still alive to do so.

Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2017-05-08 11:49:27

Are not those who complied the 2013 edition alive ? They did a successful change with Leviticus 5:1, so this is more than simply a language up date. I did wonder how to express the "passing round" of the wine, but many translations simply say to share it between you. So it is not hard to get it right.

• Reply by lazarus on 2017-05-08 14:43:12

  The 2013 translation committee, no doubt most would be alive. However, this Translation of this word -pass- Luke 22:17, is in the oringinal translation of the NWT, which started in the 1940's. I believe it is.

Comment by mattlunsford on 2020-08-22 10:45:39

I have been researching a literal Bible translation by Don Esposito called the Hebraic Roots Bible taken from the Aramaic Peshitta and Dead Sea scrolls as the source texts. He claims to have found many errors in common Bibles because they all use the masoretic text as the source. I am no translator or authority in any sense but i have found it interesting. Here is one example of a clarification:

Hebraic Roots Bible;

Mat 19:23 And Yahshua said to His disciples, Truly I say to you that a rich man will with great difficulty enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
24 And again I say to you, It is easier for a heavy rope to pass through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of YAHWEH.

In Aramaic as in Hebrew there are no vowels, simply markings under the words, which many times are not listed. The word for camel in Aramaic is gamla and would look like this "gml". The word for heavy rope is gamala and would also look like "gml" without the vowels. So when the translator translated this scripture from Aramaic to Greek, he simply made a mistake and put camel instead of heavy rope. This is a Jewish idiom. You cannot put a heavy rope through a needle, but if you take it apart strand by strand, then one strand can go through. Yahshua is using this idiom to show that a rich person would need to give up his possessions strand by strand or piece by piece to enter the Kingdom of Yahweh.