Search results

"This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him." John 6:65 Without the enablement of the Father no one can come to Jesus. They have no ability of their own.

That's because the 'imaginative' article was written six years ago.

Does the NLT and CSB do those dastardly things?

Gender-neutral Bible translations do not exist; at least in the top twenty versions. But why not go to the extremities to prove a point. Let's see how many straw men you can erect and then tear down.

It's interesting that the CSB is not mentioned though it uses almost the same amount of inclusive language as the NIV.

Be honest. You are only speaking of the NIV. And of course your assertions are total rubbish.

By the way, in the preface to the 1984 NIV, TNIV and the 2011 NIV there is no mention of thought-for-thought translating.

You just said in your post #61 that you didn't want it to be about translation methods. Make up your [snip] mind.

JJ, you're being silly and petty. I have never seen such a big tadoo over nothing.

Ore you joshing? In your OP you said you wanted a discussion about the definition of translating. That's exactly what I have been doing. They say that memory and eyesight are the first to go.

I had low-balled it. As of today there were 400 deaths. Of those 98 were new ones. What sounds like unbelievable numbers will be commonplace soon. Not that we will take it lightly, but what folks thought was fear-mongering turns out to be a realistic appraisal. I had actually underestimated...

You are not a Bible scholar. I asked you to name a Bible scholar who believes as you do. Bill Mounce is considerably more informed about these matters than you are.

Bill Mounce, from his blog entry of August 15, in an article called Literal Translations And Paraphrases. Here's a snippet : "Translation is the process by which we reproduce the meaning of the text, translation does not replicate the form of the text."

But it says :"first in terms of meaning." Your eyes are not up to their optical optimum.

Here's a fragment of a paper by Bill Mounce called Do Formal Equivalent Translations Reflect A Higher View Of Plenary, Verbal Inspiration? "The CSB has also invented a term, 'optimal equivalence' which is basically meaningless. All their statistics are based on the correlation of English words...

I don't understand what your issue is. The NRSV says "and the stars" meaning that God made them.The KJV, NKJV, ASV and RSV explicitly say "he made the stars also."

Steven M. Voth authored chapter 4. I'll offer a snip from his opening paragraph. "It is a well-known fact that translations of any text are never neutral or objective. This is equally true of translations of the Bible. For many years the Christian church lived under the illusion that the...

Mark L. Strauss has chapter 4. I will offer a snip : "There is, in fact, no such thing as a 'literal translation' (i.e., single, uniform, corresponding exactly with the Hebrew), since every Hebrew word or phrase in this verse (and in virtually any verse) could be translated in a variety in a...

You have updated us regularly about the calamity going on in Italy. Even Cuban doctors are coming to the aide of the Italians. The death rate in America will be in the thousands next month. Before May it will be more than 1,000 in a single day. This is nothing to sneeze at. And no victim of this...

All versions indicate that God made the stars in that verse. It's just that the CEB put that at the start of the verse; just about all other translations put it at the end of the passage. Again, what you see as dangerous are in reality non-essentials.