21st Century King James Version (KJ21)

[John of Japan]

JOJ, you have the unmitigated gall, the unabashed temerity to question my qualifications. You know nothing of the priesthood of believers. My view, footnote idioms, is shared by many versions that do just that, such as the NET. [personal attack removed]

I have every bit as much right to my opinions on how to best translate scripture as you do. And my views are supported by many published translators and commentators. The concept that man-made credentials allows you to to disqualify others is not biblical, it is not treating others as more important than ourselves. Jesus had no use for lip service Christians.

I'll ask again. Pay attention here. See if you can prove you're not a wannabe.

1. Do you know any foreign language?
2. Have you taken courses in Greek or Hebrew.
3. Do you have any training in translation?
4. Do you have any experience in translation?

If we go to a doctor, we want him to be qualified with a medical degree. If we call a plumber, we want him to be trained and licensed. If we take our car to a mechanic, we want him to be trained and qualified. Yet here you are, saying that someone who writes on Bible translation, a far more serious field, need not be qualified. For shame!

You post as if each and every idiom is scripture was identified and its intended meaning was known. Pure hogwash. We have various English translations translating idioms differently. You view is ridiculous, absurd and nonsensical.

You don't even know what my view is! I have four possible ways to translate an idiom. Do you know what they are? Have you read my article on this, which is on a theological blog for all to read?

Dr. Wallace agrees with me, in at least some cases!!!

Wallace agrees with you???? An internationally known expert with a PhD in Greek and many articles and books out agrees with an anonymous Internet denizen who writes about translation on the BB with no qualifications? Rather say that you agree with him. He doesn't know you from Adam (nor does he know me, unless he read that festschrift I had an essay in--and he may have laughed at me, who knows? )

 

[TCassidy]

JOJ, you have the unmitigated gall, the unabashed temerity to question my qualifications.

Actually, you don't have any qualifications to question.

You know nothing of the priesthood of believers.

Neither, apparently, do you. The Priesthood of the believer, contrary to your false understanding, does not mean "I am right and you are wrong."

I have every bit as much right to my opinions on how to best translate scripture as you do.

Yes, you have the right to an opinion based on your ignorance and lack of understanding while John has the right to his opinion based on a knowledge of Greek, translation philosophy, linguistics, and a Masters degree in Ancient Languages, and experience of being a bible translator and professor of New Testament Greek at a well respected bible college.

Pretty simple to see which opinion is right and which is uninformed bloviation.

 

[Yeshua1]

I'll ask again. Pay attention here. See if you can prove you're not a wannabe.

1. Do you know any foreign language?
2. Have you taken courses in Greek or Hebrew.
3. Do you have any training in translation?
4. Do you have any experience in translation?

If we go to a doctor, we want him to be qualified with a medical degree. If we call a plumber, we want him to be trained and licensed. If we take our car to a mechanic, we want him to be trained and qualified. Yet here you are, saying that someone who writes on Bible translation, a far more serious field, need not be qualified. For shame!

You don't even know what my view is! I have four possible ways to translate an idiom. Do you know what they are? Have you read my article on this, which is on a theological blog for all to read?
Wallace agrees with you???? An internationally known expert with a PhD in Greek and many articles and books out agrees with an anonymous Internet who writes about translation on the BB with no qualifications? Rather say that you agree with him. He doesn't know you from Adam (nor does he know me, unless he read that festschrift I had an essay in--and he may have laughed at me, who knows? )

What is really ironic here is that the Expert Dr wallace actually recommends the Niv 2011. version Van despises!

 

[Yeshua1]

My Pastor has 2 earned Phd, and has also a masters in Hebrew/Greek, and even he would not regard himself as an "expert"

 

[TCassidy]

Here, Van. Let me help you by breaking the ice and answering John's questions.

1. Do you know any foreign language?

Yes. I grew up in a mult-lingual home.

2. Have you taken courses in Greek or Hebrew.

Yes, and Yes. (Significantly more in Greek which I am much more comfortable with than Hebrew.)

3. Do you have any training in translation?

No.

4. Do you have any experience in translation?

No.

See how easy that is Van?

 

[Van]

I see the usual misrepresentation is on display.

I said to present the literal translation of idioms and footnote the meaning or meanings. I provided an example from the NET doing just that. Therefore the assertion by JOJ was twaddle.

Did any of the wannabe address the fact I am right? Nope. They address my lack of qualifications according to the world's value system. Not my citizenship. Truth has value in the kingdom of God.

I did not say I knew JOJ's view. So a strawman argument. Why would I care what JOJ's view on translation of idioms is? He thinks the best one is ridiculous.

Dr. Wallace footnoted the idiomatic meaning, which I presented, so he agrees with my view in some cases.; No need to change the subject.

 

[John of Japan]

I see the usual misrepresentation is on display.

I said to present the literal translation of idioms and footnote the meaning or meanings. I provided an example from the NET doing just that. Therefore the assertion by JOJ was twaddle.

Did any of the wannabe address the fact I am right? Nope. They address my lack of qualifications according to the world's value system. Not my citizenship. Truth has value in the kingdom of God.

I did not say I knew JOJ's view. So a strawman argument. Why would I care what JOJ's view on translation of idioms is? He thinks the best one is ridiculous.

Dr. Wallace footnoted the idiomatic meaning, which I presented, so he agrees with my view in some cases.; No need to change the subject.

I had a great time last week at the "Team Meeting" of a Bible translation ministry. It was great to get more training, and I learned much, including from two lecturers half my age. One lectured on "platforms" for translating in a limited access country, and the other lectured on linguistics in translating. I was privileged to be allowed to present our Japanese work for ten minutes.

So, again, here are the questions by which you can prove you're not a wannabe.

1. Do you know any foreign language?
2. Have you taken courses in Greek or Hebrew?
3. Do you have any training in translation?
4. Do you have any experience in translation?

 

[annsni]

Did any of the wannabe address the fact I am right? Nope.

Nope - we addressed the fact that you are wrong.

They address my lack of qualifications according to the world's value system.

Because that was the basis of your attack of JoJ.

 

[Van]

What supports this statement? Does the priesthood of believers means that you know languages and can translate them into other languages? I don't think so.

Anytime someone puts words in my mouth, does this mean - some absurd unbiblical view - I feel it is cheap shot. I note that not one of these wannabes provided the meaning of priesthood of believers. That means each believer has equal footing before God. No need to special folks to stand between God and us, like those holding PhDs.

That's really not a wise way to communicate the truth of what someone is saying in one language to the other. How do you say "my sweetie" to someone in France? You would call them "my little cabbage". Would it make sense if you were translating from French to English that you would put in "my little cabbage" and then footnote what it truly means? How cumbersome!

My position concerns translating scripture into English. You will not be able to show a single verse where my method would not be best.

Yes, you have as much of a right to your opinion, no matter how wrong it is. However, just because you think you have "equal" voice to a scholar doesn't mean that you have the same wisdom on the subject. "Man made credentials" shows that he IS qualified to judge whether someone was making right or wrong translational decisions. Does one need to allow false information to continue in order to make them more important than ourselves? I hope your doctor bows to your medical wisdom over his own "man made credentials" and doesn't make you less important. I'm guessing he doesn't though because he actually knows more than you do in reality.

I showed where an actual expert, Dr. Wallace, used my preferred method. I did not see where anyone offered a verse where that method would not provide the best information to someone studying to show themselves approved.

Many years ago I worked with some very smart people, holding degrees. But that did not make them infallible, sometimes they were right I was wrong, but at other times I hit closer to the mark.

Bottom line, there are those who want to suppress my views on a range of subjects, and that is wrong.

 

[Van]

I had a great time last week at the "Team Meeting" of a Bible translation ministry. It was great to get more training, and I learned much, including from two lecturers half my age. One lectured on "platforms" for translating in a limited access country, and the other lectured on linguistics in translating. I was privileged to be allowed to present our Japanese work for ten minutes.

So, again, here are the questions by which you can prove you're not a wannabe.

1. Do you know any foreign language?
2. Have you taken courses in Greek or Hebrew?
3. Do you have any training in translation?
4. Do you have any experience in translation?

Note the concerted effort to change the subject from literally translating idioms and then footnoting the meaning or meanings.

 

[TCassidy]

I see the usual misrepresentation is on display.

Quit playing the martyr. Nobody has misrepresented you. (Well, other than you misrepresenting your qualifications.)

I said to present the literal translation of idioms and footnote the meaning or meanings. I provided an example from the NET doing just that. Therefore the assertion by JOJ was twaddle.

And I posted a quote showing that the vast majority of bible translators (with the exception of a few KJVOs) use idiomatic translation. (Google it.)

Did any of the wannabe address the fact I am right?

No, because you are wrong. Again.

They address my lack of qualifications according to the world's value system. Not my citizenship. Truth has value in the kingdom of God.

Playing the martyr again? Nobody has used a world value system. We have posted the truth. You lack any qualifications in Hebrew, Greek, linguistics, and translation. You are posting out of the abundance of your own ignorance. As for your citizenship, we all have our citizenship in heaven, unless you are questioning our salvation. Are you? And are you also implying that we do not believe truth has value in the Kingdom? You sound like a Charismatic: "I'm right because - Holy Ghost!" Or a Mormon: "I'm right because - burning in my bosom!"

I did not say I knew JOJ's view.

Yes, you did. You said:

You post as if each and every idiom is scripture was identified and its intended meaning was known. Pure hogwash. We have various English translations translating idioms differently. You [SIC] view is ridiculous, absurd and nonsensical.

Dr. Wallace footnoted the idiomatic meaning, which I presented, so he agrees with my view in some cases.; No need to change the subject.

No, Dr. Wallace does not agree with you. He doesn't have a clue who you are. You agree with him in one insignificant (and wrong) way. I wish you had posted this claim earlier. I would have asked him if he knows you and agrees with you (he obviously does neither). I had a nice chat with him this past November in San Antonio at the ETS meeting.

 

[John of Japan]

10:15 Break the arm 44 of the wicked and evil man!
Hold him accountable for his wicked deeds,
which he thought you would not discover.

Footnote 44: The arm symbolizes the strength of the wicked, which they use to oppress and exploit the weak.

Dr. Wallace agrees with me, in at least some cases!!!

Tell you what, let's take a look at the "idiom" with which Van tries to prove that Wallace "agrees with" him. The problem is, it is not an idiom, but a metaphor! It is speaking about the literal arm of the wicked, which symbolizes the strength of the wicked according to the footnote.

Van strikes out again, with no apparent knowledge of the figures of speech in the Bible. There is a big difference between idioms and metaphors, you know.

 

[Van]

I see JOJ cannot even admit that the verse contains an idiom. Good Grief. Dr. Wallace says it is!!!
Footnote 44: The arm symbolizes the strength of the wicked, which they use to oppress and exploit the weak.

 

[rlvaughn]

That is interesting. Do they mean that he figured out how to breed to create mules (female horse, male donkey) or that he figured out how to breed two mules (which is unlikely since the vast majority of mules are sterile).

From two translations where I've seen this (Living Torah and Jubilee 2000) it is my understanding that they are crediting Anah with figuring out how to breed a mare and a donkey (i.e., they translate in such a way that seems to mean that).

Jubilee Bible 2000: And these are the sons of Zibeon: both Ajah and Anah; this was that Anah that invented mules in the wilderness as he fed the asses of Zibeon his father.

IMO, "found" or "discovered" in this verse means to find something that was there, not to "invent" as in Jubilee 2000.

 

[John of Japan]

Anytime someone puts words in my mouth, does this mean - some absurd unbiblical view - I feel it is cheap shot. I note that not one of these wannabes provided the meaning of priesthood of believers. That means each believer has equal footing before God. No need to special folks to stand between God and us, like those holding PhDs.

You know, one of the greatest Bible translators around today is my friend B. P. He doesn't have a PhD, but learned a bunch of languages growing up as a missionary kid. He speaks about 20 nowadays, I believe. He is self educated in Greek, but went to Israel for a year to learn Hebrew. He has translated the NT into several languages already.

Now, I agree that you might be qualified even without any degrees. So:

1. Are you self-educated to fluency in any foreign language?
2. Have you self-educated yourself in Greek and/or Hebrew to fluency in reading?
3. Have you read completely through any technical books on translation? (My friend has 200 in his library.)
4. Have you ever actually done any Bible translation on your own?

I'll be waiting.

My position concerns translating scripture into English. You will not be able to show a single verse where my method would not be best.

I showed where an actual expert, Dr. Wallace, used my preferred method. I did not see where anyone offered a verse where that method would not provide the best information to someone studying to show themselves approved.

Except that your "method" of footnoting idioms was for a metaphor, not an idiom. Maybe I should add one to the list of qualifications which you keep ducking.

5. Have you ever taken Eng. 101?

 

[TCassidy]

I feel it is cheap shot.

I agree. You trying to prove you are right and everybody else is wrong by claiming the priesthood of the believer was a cheap shot. And quite possibly a BB rule violation.

That means each believer has equal footing before God.

No, it doesn't. I means we each, as sinners, have the same standing before God as being forgiven. It has nothing at all to do with your opinion on a subject in which you have no understanding being equal to the opinion of a man who does understand what he is talking about.

I showed where an actual expert, Dr. Wallace, used my preferred method.

LOL! It has already been pointed out to you that Dr. Wallace did not address an idiom. He was addressing a metaphor. You do know they are different things, right? Didn't the priesthood of the believer explain that to you?

 

[TCassidy]

I see JOJ cannot even admit that the verse contains an idiom. Good Grief. Dr. Wallace says it is!!!
Footnote 44: The arm symbolizes the strength of the wicked, which they use to oppress and exploit the weak.

Metaphor. Not an idiom.

Idiom: a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words.

Metaphor: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.

 

[John of Japan]

I see JOJ cannot even admit that the verse contains an idiom. Good Grief. Dr. Wallace says it is!!!
Footnote 44: The arm symbolizes the strength of the wicked, which they use to oppress and exploit the weak.

"Symbolize" and "idiom" are not synonyms. Wallace did not call that an idiom, he said it "symbolizes." Not the same. Here is a definition for idiom. Pay close attention:

"idiom A set expression in which two or more words are syntactically related, but with a meaning like that of a single lexical unit" (P. H. Matthews, Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, p. 183).

 

[Van]

Lets look at another example, Deuteronomy 13:6 and the phrase "the wife of your bosom." Many translation change the translation to "your beloved wife" or the wife you embrace." But a footnote would clarify the idea, and leave the interpretation to the footnote.
Again, the student would know that scripture uses idioms or figurative expressions meant to convey an idea differing from the literal.

 

[Van]

I see two more off topic posts, nitpicking and claiming the idiom was not an idiom. No mention of the actual topic, literal translation coupled with footnotes to explain where the literal meaning is not the intended message. For example, "break the arm" idiomatic meaning "break the strength."