What's the AUTHORITY for an English Bible?

[atpollard]

Where does that fit into the all things and all means of the context? In other words, how do you tie it in and make the case?

It is a mindset.
Under the OT Law, there was only one place to worship God and all men must come to the Temple in Jerusalem. There is only one way, prescribed in great detain, for how one may worship God and who may approach God and how close different classes of people may come to God. Everything about the LAW is about restricting access to a Holy God that is first and foremost ... other.

Under the Great Commission, there is no differentiation between people (no Jew or gentile or slave or free or male or female) and there is a call to carry the Good News to the ends of the Earth by all means possible. Thus Paul would allow no cultural barrier to stand in the way of his spreading the word. As a Jew's Jew, he was willing to cross the line and embrace gentiles. As a Roman Citizen, he was willing to set aside his station and embrace slaves. It is a mindset of removing barriers to spreading the truth. Even the choice of Greek was intended to allow communication with the greatest number of people rather than because everyone in Palestine probably spoke Greek as their first (native) language.

So requiring all Christians to learn Greek and Hebrew is a Pharisaical mindset to the worship of God contrary to the spirit of the NT. Translating the Bible into vernacular languages is a continuation of the mindset that anything that lowers the bar and increases access is what Jesus would do and what Paul did.

 

[Yeshua1]

Why do you share the word of God online in English? There is no Biblical command to do so. Perhaps you should restrict all your evangelism to wandering, making tents and preaching in ancient Greek. If God wants anyone to understand, he will re-deploy the Acts 2 gift of Tongues.

That would indeed be the literal application for God not wanting to have any other bible translation made in other than biblical Greek/Hebrew!

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The New Testament was written in koine Greek, the language of most people in the Roman world. We are instructed to 'Go, and make disciples of every nation.' How can we do that without a Bible that people can read for themselves?

Translations are not modern things. The O.T. was translated into Greek long before the time of Christ on earth. The N.T. was translated into Syriac and Latin very early on, with a Gothic translation following swiftly.

 

[rlvaughn]

It is a mindset.
Under the OT Law, there was only one place to worship God and all men must come to the Temple in Jerusalem. There is only one way, prescribed in great detain, for how one may worship God and who may approach God and how close different classes of people may come to God. Everything about the LAW is about restricting access to a Holy God that is first and foremost ... other.

Under the Great Commission, there is no differentiation between people (no Jew or gentile or slave or free or male or female) and there is a call to carry the Good News to the ends of the Earth by all means possible. Thus Paul would allow no cultural barrier to stand in the way of his spreading the word. As a Jew's Jew, he was willing to cross the line and embrace gentiles. As a Roman Citizen, he was willing to set aside his station and embrace slaves. It is a mindset of removing barriers to spreading the truth. Even the choice of Greek was intended to allow communication with the greatest number of people rather than because everyone in Palestine probably spoke Greek as their first (native) language.

So requiring all Christians to learn Greek and Hebrew is a Pharisaical mindset to the worship of God contrary to the spirit of the NT. Translating the Bible into vernacular languages is a continuation of the mindset that anything that lowers the bar and increases access is what Jesus would do and what Paul did.

Thanks for this. You make some good points that I haven't seen expressed this way before. I must admit I was skeptical when you first mentioned 1 Corinthians 9 -- mainly because in my experience I've seen a lot of people wrest it into a "end justifies the means" text. As I read your points, I also thought of John 4:21-24, Acts 15:8-9, and Romans 10:11-13 (which you alluded to) to support and complement 1 Corinthians 9.

You may not have noticed if you haven't seen all my posts, but I am not opposed to translating the Bible into the languages of the world. What I was trying to do was push respondents into defending translation with scriptural principles rather than just assuming it is OK. In conjunction with this post, I also wrote about "Translating the Word of God" on my blog.

 

[Ready to Harvest]

Here's what the KJV translators had to say on the matter, which seems relevant, if but a little:

But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue? as it is written, "Except I know the power of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shall be a Barbarian to me." [1 Cor 14] The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not Hebrew the ancientest, not Greek the most copious, not Latin the finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto them. The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous; [Clem. Alex. 1 Strom.] so the Roman did the Syrian, and the Jew (even S. Jerome himself called the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) [S. Jerome. Damaso.] so the Emperor of Constantinople [Michael, Theophili fil.] calleth the Latin tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: [2::Tom. Concil. ex edit. Petri Crab] so the Jews long before Christ called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better than barbarous. Therefore as one complaineth, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: [Cicero 5::de finibus.] so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen 29:10]. Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which is deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, "Read this, I pray thee," he was fain to make this answer, "I cannot, for it is sealed." [Isa 29:11]

 

[rlvaughn]

We've not commented on this in awhile, but I'm going to add what I think is the best authority for Bible translation:

Every time the New Testament references the Old Testament it does so by way of translation from one language (Hebrew) to another (Greek) -- thereby stamping approval on the principle of Bible translation.