Do Bible Translators deliberately Mistranslate?

[Yeshua1]

From the beginning refers to creation and since creation, it does not refer to before creation. Stating an obvious falsehood Martin is beneath you. James 2:5 indicates God chose individuals who were poor to the world, thus existing within created and fallen mankind. This fits with from the beginning. Lots of verses indicate this obvious fact. You view has no actual support in scripture.

The election before creation in Ephesians 1:4 was Christ being chosen as God's Redeemer, and therefore all those His Redeemer would redeem were corporately chosen in Him. The promise given "long ages ago" refers to promises God gave to His creation. See Romans 1:2. Those chosen in 1 Peter 1:2 were chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father and indicates those chosen were chosen according to God's redemption plan formulated before creation, i.e. chosen from the beginning through faith in the truth.

The election and choosing by God would be before we even existed, correct?

 

[Yeshua1]

Being totally confused is not beneath you. From the beginning means that there was never a time that God's elect were not chosen for salvation. This is absolutely in line with Ephesians 1:4 and Titus 1:2, not to mention 2 Thessalonians 2:13. He tells them, "I have loved you with an everlasting love" There was never a time when God did not love His elect.

You are getting more and more silly. 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.' How many people were around then? God is the 'I AM;' He sits outside time and all that happens He has decreed in eternity. He knew who was going to be rich or poor

Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world........having predestined us to adoption as sons.' WE were chosen before the foundation of the world. Get it right.

You are all over the place. I can't make out what you are trying to say. There is no time signature on Romans 1:2; all it we know from that verse is that it is in the past. We then go to Eph. 1:4; Titus 1:2 etc. to find out how far in the past. 'In hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began.' How long before time began? We can't say because time hadn't begun!! 1 Peter 1:2 speaks of the foreknowledge of God; are you saying that God did not know who His elect were until time started? That contradicts all the other verses. What we know is that there was never a time when God had not made the promise of eternal life, and that we (i.e. Christians) were chosen before the foundation of the world.

I think that he holds to God elected us based upon our faith in Jesus, when we decided to get saved, and than election started from Gods viewpoint.

 

[Rippon]

I thought this was a great Blog post by William Mounce.

The only way you could show a deliberate mistranslation is to find a passage where there simply is no debate on the meaning of the passage, especially as reflected by the different translations, and then show the NIV taking an interpretive position that the Greek could not bear.

I would never impugn a person’s motives since I couldn’t know them, and I would never accuse a person of deliberately mistranslating a text when all they are doing is the best they can in conveying the meaning of the Greek into English. Sure, there are going to be disagreements, but that is a far cry from intentional mistranslations.

I was just reading this on his blog. I think the above is the crux of the matter.

The title of the article by Mounce is Do Bible Translations Deliberately Mistranslate? 1/12/2018

 

[agedman]

I was just reading this on his blog. I think the above is the crux of the matter.

The title of the article by Mounce is Do Bible Translations Deliberately Mistranslate? 1/12/2018

“The best they can do” is a point that I personally would be uncomfortable in giving assent.

My reserve comes primarily in knowing that ones personal best is typically not how humankind attend to in matters of work and devotion.

If fact, even the dishonest person will admit to rarely extending themselves above what is satisfactory to themselves.

Then when bias, culture, politics... even such things as personal conflicts are pressing upon a person, more often the work is limited.

“Good enough” is typically human.

 

[Rippon]

“The best they can do” is a point that I personally would be uncomfortable in giving assent.

My reserve comes primarily in knowing that ones personal best is typically not how humankind attend to in matters of work and devotion.

If fact, even the dishonest person will admit to rarely extending themselves above what is satisfactory to themselves.

Then when bias, culture, politics... even such things as personal conflicts are pressing upon a person, more often the work is limited.

“Good enough” is typically human.

Do you expect perfection from fallible humans? Have you ever met the standard of perfection in anything?

Translation teams are composed of multiple people called committees. On any textual decision no action is taken by a single person --majority rules. That's the best we can hope for this side of heaven.

 

[agedman]

Do you expect perfection from fallible humans? Have you ever met the standard of perfection in anything?

Translation teams are composed of multiple people called committees. On any textual decision no action is taken by a single person --majority rules. That's the best we can hope for this side of heaven.

In which I am in agreement.

However, more often “teams” were not used when original source material was written. For example, the Vulgate, or the Textus Receptus we’re not team efforts.

The words, “the best they can do,” are indications and acknowledgement of frailty.

Imo, the wise theologian, preacher, teacher, ... should strive to discern the intent “of” the translation as well as the words used “in” the translation.

The phrase, “For all intents and purposes,” comes to mind as how one should work through what is presented in any translation. This thinking should be driven back even to discerning the source work of Erasmus and Jerome or any other earlier manuscript.

 

[Rippon]

In which I am in agreement.

You could have made a much shorter post with just the above.

However, more often “teams” were not used when original source material was written. For example, the Vulgate, or the Textus Receptus we’re not team efforts.

Dr. Mounce was referencing modern translations.

Imo, the wise theologian, preacher, teacher, ... should strive to discern the intent “of” the translation as well as the words used “in” the translation.

The subject is translations and translators.