Tell me about the CSB

Prove you believe they're opposites. Just explain how "before" in Rev 13:8, if right, would change your theology. If you try to wiggle out of giving an explanation, it'll be taken as a concession that you're wrong.

"God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith" does not say "chosen... as rich in faith". You're inserting "as" into a botched nonsense verse to try to make it meaningful. You're also changing the ESV's "to be" to "to become".

"Saved" can be a noun. But, there's no such thing as a 1:1 translation. Compromises are made in every verse, in every translation. Sometimes nouns are changed to verbs, it doesn't mean the translation is bad.

I don't see how any of your arguments have the slightest impact on the KJV vs. ESV Calvinist teachings. It looks like you're finding fault just of the sake of finding fault.

 

No need, you have made your case. You are simply posting obvious falsehoods. What a waste.

 

As I said, "If you try to wiggle out of giving an explanation, it'll be taken as a concession that you're wrong." Just as I expected, you balked at attempting to explain your claim, because it was all a bluff from the start.

 

Anyone can post before creation is the same as since creation and ask for proof it is not, and then say if someone does not waste time addressing the obvious, they are wiggling. Such is the sum and substance of Calvinism.

 

You are moving the goal post. You said before and since are opposites.

You have failed to even remotely prove any of your 3 claims.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

I'm asking for the lowest standard of proof possible, just evidence you believe yourself what you're saying, by simply telling us how you think the ESV changes doctrine by the word "before", which you claim is the opposite of "from". You can't do that because your whole claim is a bluff and nonsense. Your are operating purely out of anti-ESV bigotry.

You can say it shows Calvinist bias, but that means nothing. How it is any more pro-Calvinist than "from" the foundation of the world?

 

Yet another deflection post. The ESV has been shown to have a systemic problem with truth.
1, The changed since creation to before creation, Revelation 13:8
2. They added "to be" to James 2:5 to change our conditional election based on faith and love of God, to an unconditional election.
3. They changed the noun salvation into the verb saved to once again hide our conditional election based on faith.

 

You've got a big fat nothing! That sad thing is that you've made it one of your goals to drive drive people away from arguably the best modern English translation to worse translations. You're doing a disservice to God's people.

 

Yet another self righteous disparagement of another. Deflection times two.

The ESV has been shown to have a systemic problem with truth.
1, They changed since creation to before creation, Revelation 13:8
2. They added "to be" to James 2:5 to change our conditional election based on faith and love of God, to an unconditional election.
3. They changed the noun salvation into the verb saved to once again hide our conditional election based on faith.

 

ESV, "Everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world."

KJV, "The Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world."

Van, for the rest of my life I'm going to use your argument here as illustrative of the obtuseness of KJVO reasoning (and IFB in the bigger picture). You gnash your teeth at "before" vs. "from", saying they're opposites, but being totally unable (even unwilling to attempt) to make a case there there's effectively any difference in meaning. While at the same time totally ignoring, even after it has been pointed out to you several times, that there is a big difference in the ESV vs. KJV of Revelation 13:8, that of changing "the lamb who was slain..." to "everyone whose name..." in connection with before/from the foundation of the world.

KJVO is a bizarre movement of people screaming about little nothings while militantly ignoring mountains.

 

1) Only an "obtuse" person would falsely claim I am a KJVO poster.
2) Did I say before was opposite of from? Nope I said before creation is opposite of since creation.
3) Yes, I ignore your effort to change discussion of the ESV disinformation at Revelation 13:8 with the KjV error at the same verse. It is non-germane.

My favorite study bible is the NASB95, and I like to compare it to the NKJV, WEB, LEB, and NET. Also other versions are useful including the ESV, NIV, and CSB.

 

I didn't say you were KJVO. I did say that your argument against the ESV is illustrative of KJVO reasoning, making a big deal out of practically nothing while ignoring mountains.

Yet, you have continually failed to show that "from" and "before" are opposite, or even just different, in any meaningful way, in the context of Revelation 13:8.

I used the LEB for a while some years ago, not bad as a reference Bible. The NET Bible (netbible.org, not the New English Translation) is excellent for its notes. I wish all translators would provide verse by verse notes explaining their translation choices. NKJV is a great choice for most churches and lay people who want to study Bible. So is the ESV a great choice, especially for churches not so tied to the KJV tradition. I have no use the the NIV or CSB. The NIV and NASB are good in their older versions, but not where they're headed today.

 

1) I refuse to debate that before creation is not the same as since creation. You can continue to make that absurd argument.

2) I have provided 3 verses where the ESV mistranslates the text. In all three the NASB95 translation is correct. The more I used the ESV the more problems I found. The NASB95 has problems too, but in my opinion, way less.

3) In an older version of the NIV it too had "apo" translated as "before." However more recent versions corrected the error. Ask yourself why.

 

You've made no argument. You made a nonsense declaration that the two words are opposites, but you refuse to make any effort to support that declaration.

Welcome to 2020 and the NASB will move to "gender neutral" language and other compromises with our non-Christian culture. It's not hard to find hundreds of verses the ESV handles batter than the NASB95. And, your promotion of the NASB95 effectively is the promotion of the NASB20.

I stated from the start that I like "from" better. But, your belief that the apo differences are significant is only in your imagination.

 

Before creation refers to a different period than since creation. That is ten words.

I did not promote the next revision of the NASB. I promoted the NASB95.

Although you say there are hundreds of verses where the ESV handles them better, you did not post even one.

To date you have not acknowledged before creation refers to a different period than since or from creation. To date you have not acknowledged the ESV translation of Revelation 13:8 is a mistranslation.

The more I used the ESV, the more problems I found. Many people have come to the same conclusion.

Returning to the CSB, one of the attributes of the CSB is it reduced the number of "novel" translations from the HCSB.

 

@Shoostie,

You can prefer ESV if you want to. Does not change the fact that "before" does not mean the same as "from." Nor that the RSV used "before" in Revelation 13:8 and the NRSV corrected it back to "from."

CSB translates in Revelation 13:8 using "from."

 

I was wondering when someone would mention the ESV uses "before" in Revelation 13:8. Naaaaa. What I'm really wondering is when is when someone who points that out going to explain what difference it makes.

The CSB changes Christ to Messiah more than a couple dozen times. What's with that? Do Christ-ians not know what Christ means? In Matthew 16:16, Peter says to Jesus "You are the Christ" (ESV), "You are the Messiah" (CSB).

Why do I know you're going to say Messiah is a good translation? Why do people who have bad doctrines always defend mistranslations that favor their bad doctrines. If they mean the same thing, why not stick to the word found in every Greek manuscript on the planet?

Neither you nor Van have said, in spite of much opportunity, why from vs. before makes a difference in Revelation 13:8. I haven't defended "before", I just point out that it doesn't make much of a difference.

Peter, in certain fact, did not use the word "messiah" when he spoke nearly 2000 years ago. But, some people want to judaize Christianity. They'd prefer to translate a word to Hebrew (Messiah) than to English to create a false impression, which, in the process, trashes the reliability of scripture and tarnishes Christianity.

 

Before creation is a different period than since creation. I have said this numerous times.
Thus the actions ascribed to before creation in fact occur since creation. When were names not written, and by inference other names written in the Lamb's book of life. Since creation in reality, before creation according to the mistranslation. If we were chosen individually before creation, as Calvinism claims, our names should have been written before creation. However, since our names are written since creation, we were individually chosen for salvation since creation.

So the mistranslation conforms to the bogus doctrine of Calvinism.

 

Names in the book. I hold a view all names are in the book because of my understanding that Christ paid for the sins of both the dead (the perishing) and the living (whom God saves), 1 John 2:2. The lost having their names removed, Revelation 20:15. Children who die prior to an age to believe are safe, Mark 10:14-15. Those who are born again, their names will never be removed, 1 John 5:4, Revelation 3:5, Revelation 21:7.

 

Rev 20:15 does not say their names are removed. It is not found in the book. Rev 13:8 indicates their name was never written in the book.




Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk