dee,<quoted text> You don't need to quote from the actual WT publication for they are all in your head and in your post and that is your truth...twisted interpretation of scripture with lots of assumptions thrown in all per WTS script as you pick and chose from many bibles what you thing suits the WT teachings. That is exactly how th WT came up with their NWT...pick and chose, add and delete words of many bibles to suit their bias teachings.
What will they do when those teachings are flip flopped again, a new bible addition?
If what you say were true, how is it that about 90 % of the time I quote from the well accepted NASB.
Many times if a certain poster prefers the KJV, I will use that translation. If they prefer the the NKJV, I quote from that translation.
If I am discussing something with a Catholic, I will use the NAB and sometimes the New Jerusalem Catholic translations of the Bible.
Sometimes I may quote from several translations, to show that in some cases a certain translation doesn't agree with all of the rest.
Doing this, I find how many different scholars have rendered a certain verse, and arrive at the most likely conclusion, because I believe the Bible interprets itself.
I never use the NWT here, because I find it is much more effective to use a translation that others are more likely to accept.
Your opinion of how the NWT translators came up with their translation isnt true. They actually did translate from the original languages into modern English, using many Greek and Hebrew texts. Just because they hadnt attended some school of higher learning affiliated with the churches, they were all capable and careful translators.
If you take the NWT, and compare it with many of the translations that have come out since the NWT was published, you will find that these later translations are very close to the renderings that the NWT translators that were way before them. If they didnt know how to translate, why have these many other translations produced renderings so close to the NWT renderings?
Just one last thought. The NWT has had only one minor revision since it was first published in 1950, and that was in 1970.
There have been revisions in the footnotes, and some of the cross references that are only supporting information. But have you checked how many times other translations have been revised since they were first published?