A Doctrine of Translation

[Iconoclast]

Once again JOJ shows just how "experienced" he is in thinking his views are better than the differing views of others.
Speaking in a language known to others from another culture, but unknown to the speaker is a miracle. And baptists hold that the modern day babbling is not speaking in another tongue but disinformation.

More experience does not make the less experienced banned from pointing out errors in translation. Skill in assessing the validity of translation choices can be learned.

Speaking a language known by another culture, but unknown to the speaker was a miraculous gift to authenticate the message, and as a sign and wonder gift, it ceased once the New Testament was written. Yes some people are gifted in language skills far above other people, but the idea only "specially gifted people" can engage in translation is fiction.

what is fiction is your idea that you know more than people actually experienced and gifted to do this work.The suggestion that you would question JoJ on this is ludicrous.
I still remember that day that Archangel took you to school when you were offering your ideas,on the Greek,lol

 

[SavedByGrace]

Once again JOJ shows just how "experienced" he is in thinking his views are better than the differing views of others.
Speaking in a language known to others from another culture, but unknown to the speaker is a miracle. And baptists hold that the modern day babbling is not speaking in another tongue but disinformation.

More experience does not make the less experienced banned from pointing out errors in translation. Skill in assessing the validity of translation choices can be learned.

Speaking a language known by another culture, but unknown to the speaker was a miraculous gift to authenticate the message, and as a sign and wonder gift, it ceased once the New Testament was written. Yes some people are gifted in language skills far above other people, but the idea only "specially gifted people" can engage in translation is fiction.

this is a JOKE. as coming from someone who does not understand Greek prepositions as in John 1:3, and Hebrews 1:2, it shows your clear ignorance of Greek grammer!

 

[John of Japan]

While I wait for Van's information on his translation effort, please note. If the "tongues" (languages) in 1 Cor. 12-14 are only miraculous, then why would an interpreter be needed? 1 Cor. 14:28--"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God."

No interpreters were needed in Acts 2, when the languages were clearly miraculous.

 

[SavedByGrace]

While I wait for Van's information on his translation effort, please note. If the "tongues" (languages) in 1 Cor. 12-14 are only miraculous, then why would an interpreter be needed? 1 Cor. 14:28--"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God."

No interpreters were needed in Acts 2, when the languages were clearly miraculous.

Very true. It is evident from verse 21, "In the Law it is written, “By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.” (from Isaiah 28:11), that human languages are meant. As you say, the account on the Day of Pentecost was unique, where the Lord attested to the work He was doing through His servants, by "signs and wonders", as we also read of people being healed by the shadow of John (Acts 5:15); and Paul's "skin" in Acts 19:12.

 

[John of Japan]

There are two words for "interpret"/"translate" in the NT. The one used in the Gospels and Acts is μεθερμηνευω, "translate, give the meaning in a different language; passive be translated or interpreted" (Friberg's Anlex). The one Paul uses (only in 1 Cor. 12-14) is a synonym, διερμηνευω. It means, "translate (AC 9.36); interpret, explain (LU 24.27; 1C 12.30)" (Friberg). These are not miraculous actions. Therefore, the word "interpret" in 1 Cor. 12-14 is not a miraculous gift, but a providential one. The miraculous gift of tongues as in Acts 2 may have ceased (that's a different discussion), but it is not the same as in 1 Cor. 12-14.

 

[SavedByGrace]

There are two words for "interpret"/"translate" in the NT. The one used in the Gospels and Acts is μεθερμηνευω, "translate, give the meaning in a different language; passive be translated or interpreted" (Friberg's Anlex). The one Paul uses (only in 1 Cor. 12-14) is a synonym, διερμηνευω. It means, "translate (AC 9.36); interpret, explain (LU 24.27; 1C 12.30)" (Friberg). These are not miraculous actions. Therefore, the word "interpret" in 1 Cor. 12-14 is not a miraculous gift, but a providential one. The miraculous gift of tongues as in Acts 2 may have ceased (that's a different discussion), but it is not the same as in 1 Cor. 12-14.

very true!

 

[George Antonios]

Again, 2 Tim. 3:16 very obviously refers to miraculous events. When "God breathes" ("inspiration," θεοπνευστος), that was an event, not a process. Events called miracles ("miracle," "sign," "wonder") in the Bible are invariably one time events. Study it out, like I did and you will see.

The irony is just too rich because 2Timothy 3:16, in its immediate context, refers to the scriptures which Timothy had in his hand as a 1st century half-breed Greek.

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy SCRIPTURES, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2Ti 3:16 All SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Paul applies the doctrine of inspiration to the actual hand-held scriptures that Timothy had, which evidently could not have been the original autographs. So Paul believed that copies are given by inspiration of God.

We thus lay aside the wisdom of this world which the serpent has fed the seminary and college professors, and stick to a Biblical view of inspiration.

And not a word of this was about the King James Bible...so don't even go there to change the subject.

 

[Van]

Forgive me. I'm willing to admit you are an experienced translator with sufficient knowledge to make these statement. (I have little patience with "wannabes.") I'm working on a D.Min. and I'm planning my dissertation to be on the formation of Bible translation efforts. So, I'm making a preliminary list of such efforts and their contact information. (I already have names from efforts in India, Mongolian, Nepal, Lithuania, the Tajiks, Farsi [one of my students on Bible translation in our seminary], etc.) Please help me out. I'll ask for some preliminary information here, and you can send me your real name by PM--and of course I'll give my name and contact information that way. So:

What is the target language for your effort?
What is your source language and source text?
What form does your effort take (single linguist, working as a consultant, supporting a committee of national translators, lead translator yourself, etc.)?

Thank you.

Did I indicate I translate from the original language into English? Or do I evaluate various English translations by study to derive what think is the best most accurate translation.

Disinformation hinders the ministry of Christ.

 

[Van]

what is fiction is your idea that you know more than people actually experienced and gifted to do this work.The suggestion that you would question JoJ on this is ludicrous.
I still remember that day that Archangel took you to school when you were offering your ideas,on the Greek,lol

Pay no attention to disinformation posters.
Did I indicate I know more about translation than JOJ? Of course not. So a false charge by the twaddler.
Can I question the translation choices of translators, especially when the translation choices differs from version to version? Of course.
And your fiction about the exchange between Archangel and myself you have repeated at least twice. Doubling down on disinformation hinders the ministry of Christ.

 

[Van]

this is a JOKE. as coming from someone who does not understand Greek prepositions as in John 1:3, and Hebrews 1:2, it shows your clear ignorance of Greek grammer!

Pay no attention to clear ignorance of John 1:3 and Hebrews 1:2. Have I posted my view? Yes. Has the taint so twaddler? Of course not.

While I wait for Van's information on his translation effort, please note. If the "tongues" (languages) in 1 Cor. 12-14 are only miraculous, then why would an interpreter be needed? 1 Cor. 14:28--"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God."

No interpreters were needed in Acts 2, when the languages were clearly miraculous.

Is this view a Baptist view? Of course not.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Paul applies the doctrine of inspiration to the actual hand-held scriptures that Timothy had, which evidently could not have been the original autographs.

what utter rubbish you talk! and you are supposed to be a pastor, and here you are yet again undermining the Auhtority and Inspiration of the Word of God!!!

 

[SavedByGrace]

Pay no attention to clear ignorance of John 1:3 and Hebrews 1:2. Have I posted my view? Yes. Has the taint so twaddler? Of course not

you need some patience, as I am a very busy person. I will be adding my own research here shortly, which demolishes any suggestion of ANY "subordination" of Jesus to the Father pre-Incarnation, and demonstrate from the Greek, that Jesus is the ACTUAL Creator, as are The Father and Holy Spirit. Check by as you may learn a thing or two, if you are humble enough!

 

[Van]

this is a JOKE. as coming from someone who does not understand Greek prepositions as in John 1:3, and Hebrews 1:2, it shows your clear ignorance of Greek grammer!

Did I address Jude 1:3? Of course, in another thread pointing out alternate translation choices. And in yet another thread, I showed God the Son operated in subordination to God the Father before the incarnation. And in that thread I did cite John 1:3 and Hebrews 1:2.

Jude 1:3
Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly by the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.

Again I think the implication is we contend by faith so "for the faith" might be better translated "by the faith." Note our dative of means noun is not part of a prepositional phrase. Since the righteous man lives by faith (a central tenet of the NT) anytime we see something being accomplished or achieved, such as contending earnestly, the instrumentality of faith is implied.

As far as Hebrews 1:2, 21 English translations chose to see the implication of instrumentality and translated "en" as "by or through." The preposition in John 1:3 is "di" which literally means through, and figuratively "by the means of." Thus God the Son was the means by which God the Father caused the world and everything else to be made. 27 English translations translated "di" as through or by. Nuff said.

 

[John of Japan]

Did I indicate I translate from the original language into English? Or do I evaluate various English translations by study to derive what think is the best most accurate translation.

Disinformation hinders the ministry of Christ.

If you are not an actual translator and do not know the original languages, then anything you say about how to be a translator, whether a translator is gifted by God, how to translate the Bible, what a translation ought to be like, etc., is not authoritative.

Translation is a specialized activity. One cannot translate, whether secular or Christian, with knowing at least two languages. It takes a minimum of hundreds of hours to learn a foreign language. It takes thousands of hours to translate just the New Testament. Surely you have some respect for all of that work which you have not done.

 

[John of Japan]

Is this view a Baptist view? Of course not.

Actually, it has nothing to do with Baptist doctrine what you think about tongues. Baptist doctrine follows the Baptist distinctives, which do not mention miracles. Furthermore, the view that "tongues" in 1 Cor. 12-14 are non-miraculous languages is held not only by myself but by many other Baptists. No less a Baptist theologian than John R. Rice taught that the tongues of 1 Cor. 10-12 were not miraculous, but only ordinary languages.

Now, I pointed out that "interpretation" is needed in 1 Cor. 10-12. Here are the verses:
1Co 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
1Co 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.
1Co 14:27 If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret. {two...: by two or three sentences separately}
1Co 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

If these verses were talking about a miraculous gift of tongues for evangelism as in Acts 2, then why would interpretation be needed? Interpretation was not needed in Acts 2, because the actual languages were given miraculously. However, interpretation is a process, not miraculous. (I say this as one who has interpreted many times, and made many mistakes in doing so. )

 

[Van]

I see I missed a claim:
[indent]If the "tongues" (languages) in 1 Cor. 12-14 are only miraculous, then why would an interpreter be needed? 1 Cor. 14:28--"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." [/indent]
In a mixed crowd, half Greek speaking and half Hebrew only speaking, with the speaker speaking one or the other language, an interpreter would be needed.

Lets look at 1 Corinthians 14:27-28: If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at most three, should speak in turn, and someone must interpret. 28 But if there is no interpreter, he should remain silent in the church and speak only to himself and God.

How are we to understand this message? If a person, or two or three persons are in an assemble, where the small group speaks in another language, only one or two or at most three should speak, and then an interpreter should speak to present what was said in a language understandable to the rest of the assembly. If no one is there to translate the language into one understandable to the assembly, they the ones speaking the uncommon language should remain silent.

 

[George Antonios]

what utter rubbish you talk! and you are supposed to be a pastor, and here you are yet again undermining the Auhtority and Inspiration of the Word of God!!!

Note that you did not address the interpretation, which is supported by the immediate context, just insulted me.

Also, I uphold the authority of the word of God because I believe that there is a perfect Bible.

You don't believe there is any perfect Bible that I can hold in my hand.

You are the one, brother, that undermines the authority of the word of God, because you believe and teach that all Bible versions have errors.

Matt 7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

 

[Van]

If you are not an actual translator and do not know the original languages, then anything you say about how to be a translator, whether a translator is gifted by God, how to translate the Bible, what a translation ought to be like, etc., is not authoritative.

Translation is a specialized activity. One cannot translate, whether secular or Christian, with knowing at least two languages. It takes a minimum of hundreds of hours to learn a foreign language. It takes thousands of hours to translate just the New Testament. Surely you have some respect for all of that work which you have not done.

Pay no attention to those pushing Gnostic knowledge, scripture teaches the priesthood of believers, with everyone able to share their understanding of God's word.

 

[John of Japan]

Pay no attention to those pushing Gnostic knowledge, scripture teaches the priesthood of believers, with everyone able to share their understanding of God's word.

What in the world are you talking about??? Gnostic knowledge???

 

[John of Japan]

I see I missed a claim:
[indent]If the "tongues" (languages) in 1 Cor. 12-14 are only miraculous, then why would an interpreter be needed? 1 Cor. 14:28--"But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." [/indent]
In a mixed crowd, half Greek speaking and half Hebrew only speaking, with the speaker speaking one or the other language, an interpreter would be needed.

Lets look at 1 Corinthians 14:27-28: If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at most three, should speak in turn, and someone must interpret. 28 But if there is no interpreter, he should remain silent in the church and speak only to himself and God.

How are we to understand this message? If a person, or two or three persons are in an assemble, where the small group speaks in another language, only one or two or at most three should speak, and then an interpreter should speak to present what was said in a language understandable to the rest of the assembly. If no one is there to translate the language into one understandable to the assembly, they the ones speaking the uncommon language should remain silent.

Thank you. Then you agree with me that the interpreter mentioned in 1 Cor. 12-14 is a non-miraculous gift.