Search results

"But why a literal translation is necessarily more in keeping with the doctrine of verbal inspiration, I am quite at a loss to know....The Holy Spirit who inspired the words of Scripture equally inspired the syntax and the idioms. Ultimately what we want of a translation is a rendering that...

I can tell that you wouldn't be in favor of revisions since you never revise your posts. The English language, like all languages change over time. Even grammar needs to be reviewed to make things more understandable. Those against improvements need to improve. Permit me to quote from the NET...

Y-1 is cowardly in not answering a straight-forward question. Could it be that to answer honestly would expose his lack of integrity for more than a decade?

"We would argue that a translation that places the priority of meaning over form is much more in keeping with the doctrine of inspiration, since at issue always is the 'meaning' of the inspired words. The translation that best conveys that meaning is the most faithful to this historic...

That is if they didn't want any improvements, when many translations twenty years or more of age are revised.

This is my 4th attempt to get Y-1 to answer the above. But he has been cowering in the corner afraid to reply to a simple question that exposes not only his history of false charges against the NIV, but his basic inconsistency.

What's your issue with the way James 2:5 is rendered?

Seriously Y-guy. Get your act together.

Benjamin, I think that far more than 1 million have been infected in Wuhan alone. For all of China millions more. Merkel said that 10 million in her country may be infected presently. So no, predicting that more than 2 million have been infected in NYC is perfectly in line with the rate this...

There is no such thing as a word-for-word translation. Besides, every translation omits thousands of words found in the original.

Said by someone who doesn't own it and learned more about it from my post than from any other source.

As usual, you don't know what you are talking about and you have forgotten all that has been presented to you in countless threads over the years here. Or have you intentionally 'forgotten'?

I have mixed thoughts about it. In other words, it has strengths and weaknesses. I'll start with its strengths. The English flows well. But I wouldn't say it reads as smoothly as the CEV for instance. It's about on the same grade level as other mediating translations. Yes, it belongs in that...

Or more correctly : They are warnings. ;-0

"I happen to believe that verbal inspiration is valid, but any such verbal construct relates only to the original text, not to a translation. To suggest, as some have, that such a view of inspiration mandates a particular approach to translation is (I'll try to be 'nice'!) foolishness." [Rod...

Again, the views of Tyndale and Luther are reasonable guidelines for us today. You are obsessive regarding the use of inclusive language; and quite frankly, your understanding is skewed and absolutely false in this realm.

Y-1, please review and edit your posts beforehand. Even review after posting to correct yourself. Your lack in this area demonstrates your carelessness.

It's not only a matter of respect; it's a matter of what's true and what is false. And that isn't a matter of opinion.

"Translate process"? Really? Do you understand that we have to translate your posts?

The REB vastly improved upon the NEB. Yet it still falls short of mediating versions. It has high register English which fascinates me. It's more functional than formal, but hardly any formally equivalent version has such advanced English. It has less inclusive language than the ESV.