See a local listing for it here
"The Greek word for spirit (pneuma) has many different meanings, the correct one being determined only from the context of each occurrence. In Greek pneuma, is neuter, as are all pronouns referring to the spirit, making them necessarily impersonal. Those New Testament translations, which render the “spirit” as “He” instead of “it,” do so because of trinitarian beliefs (e.g., John 14:17). If the translators had properly rendered the neuter pronouns of “the spirit of the truth” found in John 14 through 16 as “it,” “its,” “itself” and “which” instead of “He,” “His,” “Him,” “who,” and “whom,” (John 14:17, 26; 15:26; 16:7-8, 13-15) there would not be this false sense that there is personality attributed to the holy spirit." Trinity Doctrine Error: A Jewish Analysis by Gerald Sigal
Let's take a look at how Bible translations and versions treat John 14:17.
John 14:17 reads in the 1977 New American Standard Bible (like almost all mainstream/Evangelical Bibles) "that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not behold Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you, and will be in you."
Thankfully there are more accurate alternatives that you need to acquire, such as the Julia Smith Bible: "The Spirit of truth; which the world cannot receive, for it sees it not, neither knows: and ye know it; for it shall remain with you, and shall be in you."
Also:
"Even the Spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive because it perceives it not, nor knows it; but you know it because it dwells with you, and shall be within you." A Faithful Version
"It is the Spirit of Truth. The world cannot obtain that Spirit, because it does not see it or recognize it; you recognize it because it stays with you and is within you." Smith & Goodspeed Bible
"the spirit of the truth, which the world not is able to receive, because not it beholds it, nor knows it; you but know it, because with you it abides, and in you it will be." Emphatic Diaglott
"the spirit of truth, which the world can not get, for it is not beholding it, neither is knowing it. Yet you know it, for it is remaining with you and will be in you." Concordant Literal Version
"the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot receive, because it doth not behold it, nor know it; ye know it, because it abideth with you, and will be in you." The New Testament: Translated from the Greek text of Tischendorf, by George R. Noyes
"the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither beholds it nor knows it. YOU know it, because it remains with YOU and is in YOU." New World Translation
"the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you." Catholic New American Bible
"the Spirit of Truth, which the world cannot receive because it does not perceive nor know it; you know it, because it stays with you and is in you." Byington's Bible in Living English
"The Spirit of Truth. The world won’t receive it, because they can’t see it or understand it. However you will recognize it, for it will stay with you and in you." 2001translation
"even the spirit of truth: which the world cannot receive; for the world beholdeth it not, neither knoweth it: ye know it; for it abideth with you, and shall be in you." Revised Version Improved and Corrected
See also the David Bentley Hart New Testament, the Unvarnished New Testament, Revised English Version, Richmond Lattimore's New Testament, the 21st Century New Testament by Vivian Capel, New Simplified Bible, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible.
However, these Bibles are not mainstream (except for the Catholic New American Bible) and the Bibles you will find on a bookshelf or on a bestseller list have a decided bias in favor of adding personality to the spirit of God.
An article at https://restitutio.org/2015/11/05/translating-the-holy-spirit/ (The Holy Spirit and Translation Bias: A Smoking Gun of Trinity Mischief) talks about how most mainstream Bibles mistranslate pronouns to give personality to the holy spirit, and they state:
"The most frustrating aspect of this chicanery is that these translations mislead honest-hearted men and women who simply want to read and understand the Scriptures. What is more, most Bible readers implicitly trust the scholars who produce translations in the same way that most people trust doctors or school teachers. This is partly due to the impressive verbiage we saw above in their translation philosophies. The NASB team 'adhered to the literal philosophy of translation' and required 'a word-for-word translation that is accurate and precise,' yet, they literally did not translate the word “o” as “which.” The NET boasts that its nearly 61,000 translators’ notes enable readers to 'look over the translator’s shoulder' and make 'transparent the textual basis and the rationale for key renderings (including major interpretive options and alternative translations).' However, when I look at the footnotes on Acts 5.32, I see nothing whatsoever indicating they flat out changed a word to make their translation more palatable. Ironically, Daniel Wallace was one of the primary scholars involved in the NET and his paper on this subject exposes this very issue. The NIV committee stated that they were committed 'to the authority and infallibility of the Bible as God’s Word in written form,' yet they corrected the infallible Scripture in their translation to read 'whom' instead of 'which.' Isn’t a correction the result of an error? But, if Scripture is infallible, why is the NIV correcting it? Lastly, the NRSV claims it is 'the most accurate and readable translation' and that it 'leaves interpretation in the hands of the reader.' Yet, in this verse (and many others like it), it obscures the meaning of the text and does not so much as leave a footnote indicating their decision."
Buy: And the Word was a god: A New Book on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1 and The Dark History of the Trinity, is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and both are only 99 cents
No comments:
Post a Comment