As usual, you don't make sense to me. If I knew what you are talking about it would be far better.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is It Possible For Modern Translators To Fall Under the Curse Of Re 22:18,19
- Thread starter JD731
- Start date
As usual, you don't make sense to me. If I knew what you are talking about it would be far better.
37818
Well-Known Member
Revelation 22:19, ". . . And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the tree of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. . . ."
Why are you addressing me, rather than the topic?
Why do you claim to distinguish between my words and God's words, are you claiming you are a prophet?
If the premise of the thread is the claim any deviation from the KJV is "adding to or taking away from the words of this book" and therefore cursed according to Revelation 22:18-19, then the premise is absurd , laughable and ignorant nonsense.
JOJ made a good point, if at anytime a translator mistranslated a part of the text, they were cursed, that would prohibit "modern translators" and by default, result in reliance on the cursed KJV translators. Absurd, laughable and ignorant nonsense.
The idea the modern translators are not doing their best to present the intended message of God, is absurd, laughable and ignorant nonsense. Sure, some of their mistranslations seem to be agenda driven, but God uses "broken reeds" (people with faults, blind spots, and the like) to carry His ministry to the lost, so we are hold onto what is "good."
Yes, we have some deeply flawed translations, and some verses where more than one interpretation is possible, thus limiting the accuracy of all our translations. But to throw up nonsense in provincial favor of this translation as always better than all others is absurd, laughable nonsense.
To state the obvious, since all translations contain errors, when we see a deviation from one translation, to claim that is adding to scripture is nonsense.
Last edited:
The scriptural truths (Deut. 4:2, Deut. 12:32, Prov. 30:6, Rev. 22:18-19) that warn against adding to and taking away from the Scriptures would clearly and directly relate to the doctrine of preservation and to the making of copies of the original-language Scriptures. Concerning which specific words did God directly state these warnings and instructions?
These commands and instructions must embrace the Scriptures in the original languages since the very nature of translation requires that words may have to be added or omitted to make it understandable in another language. Thus, these verses were important instructions and warnings given particularly and directly concerning the Scriptures in the original languages.
Would the meaning of these verses have to be reduced to nothing or near nothing to try to suggest that these warnings were directly given concerning Bible translations?
These verses such as Revelation 22:18-19 could also be understood to suggest that God gave to men an important role or responsibility in preservation of the Scriptures on earth. These commands or instructions would indicate the need and responsibility for the making of exact, accurate, faithful copies of the Scriptures in the original languages. These commands or instructions also demonstrate that the source being copied would be the standard and authority for evaluating the copy made from it. These instructions or warnings would also affirm or suggest that the later copies of Scripture would not be given or made by the means or process of a miracle of supernatural inspiration.
These commands and instructions must embrace the Scriptures in the original languages since the very nature of translation requires that words may have to be added or omitted to make it understandable in another language. Thus, these verses were important instructions and warnings given particularly and directly concerning the Scriptures in the original languages.
Would the meaning of these verses have to be reduced to nothing or near nothing to try to suggest that these warnings were directly given concerning Bible translations?
These verses such as Revelation 22:18-19 could also be understood to suggest that God gave to men an important role or responsibility in preservation of the Scriptures on earth. These commands or instructions would indicate the need and responsibility for the making of exact, accurate, faithful copies of the Scriptures in the original languages. These commands or instructions also demonstrate that the source being copied would be the standard and authority for evaluating the copy made from it. These instructions or warnings would also affirm or suggest that the later copies of Scripture would not be given or made by the means or process of a miracle of supernatural inspiration.
Nothing wrong with being on the side of objective analysis, candor and clarity of expression. On the other side are fallacious arguments such as against the person arguments.
This whole post of yours is just presumptuous nonsense. Nobody in the world today will fall under the curse of Re 22:18-19 because they add to or take away from the Greek written letter of Revelation. Why? Because the Greek language is a dead language and almost nobody can read it and there is a disagreement on what Greek texts are the words of God. Not even the Greeks read it. The translators are not making new and better copies of the Greek NT hundreds of times over because nobody cares about it. They are reading the scriptures in English and they are making multiple translations in the English language. It is these guys who are in danger of meeting this curse head on. It is apocalyptic literature where one word is symbolic of something else and it is important that the right word be used in the symbolism, otherwise the meaning will be corrupted. Horror of horrors, there are actually people in the world today with enough brass to paraphrase the Revelation, a book with this warning in it, and there are people on this forum who applauds the practice. You may be one of them.
Your response could be considered the presumptuous nonsense as you attack an appeal to scriptural truths.
You advocate the kind of presumption concerning Bible translations that the makers of the KJV condemned in their 1611 preface.
In the 1611 preface, this is stated: “doth not a margin do well to admonish the reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident; so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption.” The 1611 preface also noted that “diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded.”
According to the large number of marginal notes in the 1611 edition, its makers must have found many places where they considered the text not to be so clear in its meaning. The makers of the KJV gave many more word-for-word, literal renderings in their marginal notes, and they also offered many acceptable, alternative renderings. In some marginal notes, they provided examples of where they gave no English word/rendering for an original-language word of Scripture in their underlying texts. These marginal notes clearly contradict any suggestion that all their translation decisions should be considered certain and unquestionable. The marginal notes could also raise doubt concerning some of their textual criticism decisions. The 1611 preface noted: “They that are wise, had rather have their judgment at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.”
I read the Greek and all of my 22 Greek students now read it. All over the world there are many 1000s of students in Bible colleges and seminaries learning to read koine Greek or already able to read it. I taught such students in Japan, teaching Japanese future preachers and preacher's wives and laymen to read the Greek NT. One of our graduates in our MA in Bible Translation where I teach now is teaching black African Bible translators how to read koine Greek so they can translate the New Testament into their Ma'adi language.
Not true. The Greek Orthodox church uses a Byzantine Greek text just like my college does, not far from the TR.
Actually, we do care about it and other translators care about it. I regularly check several different editions of the Greek NT.
So please stop posting things about the blessed Greek NT that God gave His Word in when they can be so easily debunked. It makes you look ignorant--and I did not say you were ignorant, but only that your mistakes about the Greek NT make you look ignorant.
Last edited:
What does the Greek Orthodox Church believe and teach about the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which was given him by God? Maybe they are exempt from adding to or taking away from the words of the prophecy of the Revelation because they have the Byzantine Greek texts. My question on this thread concerns the translators of the Greek.
Why is such a warning in the scriptures? It seems like an extreme penalty and that God the Father is passionate about the integrity of the words being maintained if it is meant to be legitimate. You know Greek, and it is true you are certainly much more qualified intellectually than I am to answer the question. No one has said so far, or I have missed it. What do you teach your students about it?
I have answered carefully on this thread what the verses do not mean: translation of the Bible. I have also answered what the passage actually means: those who add content to the Revelation of John. I believe by extension it means those who add content to God's revelation.
In other words, it is forbidden to add what one thinks is propositional truth to the Scriptures--literally, making your thoughts part of Scripture. I have given an example on this thread of the Eth Cepher Bible, and gave a link to it. Did you follow the link? That "Bible" adds pseudepigrapha books (faked documents of the early church) to the KJV.
The Catholics add the Apocrypha to Scripture. That is wicked. I could give many more examples.
There was a cult in the 2nd century started by a guy named Marcion. The curse extends to him, because he was a viral anti-Semite who produced his own Bible by deleting everything Jewish, for example rejecting Matthew, Mark and John as being too Jewish, and probably also the Jewish parts of Revelation.
By the way, nowadays there are many KJVO folk who believe the Greek New Testament is important. For example, check out The Translator's Greek Grammar of the Textus Receptus, by Steve Combs: Amazon.com
Another example of someone for whom the curse exists is none other than Andrew Jackson, who cut a ton of verses out of his Bible, including any suggestion that Jesus did miracles and rose from the dead. Here is an article about that: Why Thomas Jefferson Rewrote the Bible Without Jesus' Miracles and Resurrection | HISTORY
Got an email update recently from a young missionary friend involved in a church planting and Bible translating ministry in Africa to the Nubi tribespeople. (This is not the same missionary I've already mentioned.) The tribe begged him to help them with their translation effort because he is trained in Greek and Hebrew, and the version done by translators from a famous Bible translation board was so extremely poorly done.
Unlike some KJVO folks in the US, Africans know about languages and the importance of the Greek and Hebrew original languages of the Word of God--the languages God Himself chose to give His Word in.
He describes some of the semantic difficulties they are having: justification, sanctification, holy, only begotten, etc. This young man did not graduate from our school, but I highly respect him. While traveling on deputation, he took Hebrew courses online from a reputable seminary so that he could translate the Bible in Africa. My young friend teaches the Nubi translators Greek and Hebrew. Here is a video of the translation team:
I'm reminded of the Bible school where I taught in Japan. One day the prof, a good man but a KJVO type when the language is English, said to his students: "God saved me and called me to preach through the KJV, so that is the version I use." His students replied, "We were saved and called through the Japanese Shinkaiyaku translation, so we'll use that!" (He told me this story and laughed at himself.) The Shinkaiyaku is based on the translation principles of the NASV, and was supported by the Lockman Foundation! So it is certainly not a "Japanese KJV"!
Unlike some KJVO folks in the US, Africans know about languages and the importance of the Greek and Hebrew original languages of the Word of God--the languages God Himself chose to give His Word in.
He describes some of the semantic difficulties they are having: justification, sanctification, holy, only begotten, etc. This young man did not graduate from our school, but I highly respect him. While traveling on deputation, he took Hebrew courses online from a reputable seminary so that he could translate the Bible in Africa. My young friend teaches the Nubi translators Greek and Hebrew. Here is a video of the translation team:
I'm reminded of the Bible school where I taught in Japan. One day the prof, a good man but a KJVO type when the language is English, said to his students: "God saved me and called me to preach through the KJV, so that is the version I use." His students replied, "We were saved and called through the Japanese Shinkaiyaku translation, so we'll use that!" (He told me this story and laughed at himself.) The Shinkaiyaku is based on the translation principles of the NASV, and was supported by the Lockman Foundation! So it is certainly not a "Japanese KJV"!
Last edited:
The point of my thread is dealing with the warning given in Re 22:18-19 and who can be cursed. I diligently read all the translations and paraphrases and other methods of publishing of the warning into the English language, alphabetically A through L in BibleGateway web site where they are all available to peruse and nearly all of them were consistent in saying something like I quoted in the NIV about the "words" of the prophecy.
NIV
Re 22:18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from that person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.
I noted the warning was addressed to the churches and not to anyone present during the time of the fulfillment of the prophecy. This letter was sent to the churches in Asia. Those 7 churches have not been present for a long time, but the letter, with the warning, remains as part of the canon of scripture. I also noted that it was no doubt the words of the prophecy that was of concern to John, who wrote what he heard and saw as he was commanded. All these translations seemed to agree because that is the way they are presented.
I think I understand your answer about it, John of Japan. You gave examples. Translations with different words in the same language does not violate the spirit of the prophecy.
You would not entertain the idea that God has translated his scriptures from Hebrew and Greek into any other language in order to preserve his truth. If this misrepresents your position it is not my purpose.
You seem to have stated my positions well enough. Thanks for taking the time to read and understand.
One very recent edition of the Greek New Testament is called the Solid Rock Greek New Testament. There are two versions. My son uses the "Scholar's Edition," which has an excellent apparatus for textual criticism. He recommends it to his seminary students: https://www.amazon.com/Solid-Greek-Testament-Scholars-Ancient/dp/0999532200/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1OYYH16ZJ9Y28&keywords=solid+rock+greek+new+testament&qid=1699623482&s=books&sprefix=solid+rock+gree,stripbooks,85&sr=1-2
I regularly use the plain edition, called the Portable Edition, which I originally bought to see if we should use it in my Greek 101 class, but we stuck to the TR because the Trinitarian Bible Society gives it to us for free! Here is the Portable Edition: https://www.amazon.com/Solid-Greek-Testament-Portable-Ancient/dp/0999532219/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1OYYH16ZJ9Y28&keywords=solid+rock+greek+new+testament&qid=1699623651&s=books&sprefix=solid+rock+gree,stripbooks,85&sr=1-1
P. S. The Solid Rock Greek NT is an edition of the Byzantine Textform.
Last edited: