This article is listed in the Answers category
Question 19 of Stumper Questions for Jehovah’s Witnesses
The NWT translates the Greek word “kyrios” as “Jehovah” more than 25 times in the New Testament (Mt 3:3, Lk 2:9, Jn 1:23, Acts 21:14, Rom 12:19, Col 1:10, 1Thess 5:2, 1Pet 1:25, Rev 4:8, etc.). Why is the word “Jehovah” translated when it does not appear in the Greek text? Why is the NWT not consistent in translating kyrios (kurion) as “Jehovah” in Rom 10:9, 1Cor 12:3, Phil 2:11, 2Thess 2:1, and Rev 22:21 (see Gr-Engl Interlinear)?
As has already been stated in response to question number 12 the anecdotal evidence is that the personal name of God was removed by later copyists. Since there are no known originals in existence it cannot be proven that such was not the case.
While it would be impossible to determine with certainty where the name might have appeared in the original writings of the apostles, a translator is certainly justified in putting the name of God into passages in the New Testament where a direct quotation is made from the Hebrew where the YHWH definitely appeared.
For example, in the verse cited above Matthew 3:3 is a quotation from the prophecy of Isaiah, where we read: “Clear up the way of Jehovah! Make a straight highway through the desert for our God.”
Other places where the name Jehovah appears are not direct quotations, but the context warrants the use of the divine name. For example, Colossians 1:10 (also cited above) uses the name, where Paul wrote: “so as to walk worthily of Jehovah in order to please him fully as you go on bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the accurate knowledge of God…”
In this instance the context indicates Paul to be referring to God and not Jesus. Since the trinitarian translators have intentionally perpetuated the confusion regarding the distinction between Jehovah and Jesus by removing the name of God and substituting LORD in the Hebrew text, honest translators are not bound by some rule of consistency when it promotes the trinitarian’s deceptive scheme. In this instance it does not seem proper to use “Lord” in a place even in the NT where it may contribute to the confusion trinitarians promote. Hence, where the context clearly refers to the Father and not the Son, either God or Jehovah would be preferable to “Lord.”
Other Watchman blogs