How often do you encounter a C&A debate outside of the BB?

[Particular]

There is no translation.

They begin with a paraphrase.

Pure death in the pot.

The title has the word in it, when they have to invent some new expression to try to explain that they are tasked with revising a paraphrase.

"dynamic equivalence"

Translation: Spurious flesh for sale.

They begin with Hebrew and Greek. Where they differ from the ESV is they take the Hebrew or Greek word or phrase and they translate the meaning of that word or phrase rather than write the closest English word for each Hebrew or Greek word. They attempt to reduce the choppy feel of the English translation that happens when the original language and English language don't work by the same rules.
If you want a best translation then I suggest you become fluent in both Hebrew and Greek. Otherwise, any English translation is going to be flawed.
I generally prefer the ESV, but I will check the ESV by reading other translations as well to see how the translators differed.

 

[Alan Gross]

They begin with Hebrew and Greek. Where they differ from the ESV is they take the Hebrew or Greek word or phrase and they translate the meaning of that word or phrase rather than write the closest English word for each Hebrew or Greek word. They attempt to reduce the choppy feel of the English translation that happens when the original language and English language don't work by the same rules.
If you want a best translation then I suggest you become fluent in both Hebrew and Greek. Otherwise, any English translation is going to be flawed.
I generally prefer the ESV, but I will check the ESV by reading other translations as well to see how the translators differed.

This is not a translation.

A revision of a paraphrase is a piece of garbage.

The flesh and carnal thoughts of sin-cursed minds not even starting with a text that hasn't been re-worded by the flesh and carnal thoughts of sin-cursed minds is pure evil.

The Living "Bible" was not of God, as a paraphrase, and the effort to revise it and call it a 'Translation', when they admit it is not, doubles the error.

Placing a criteria of "any English translation is going to flawed", is playing right straight into the Devil's hand.

Same with, "they begin with Hebrew and Greek".

Tampered with Hebrew and Greek, like all the other Modern Bibles?

Garbage in, Garbage out.

Not of God.

 

[Alan Gross]

They begin with Hebrew and Greek. Where they differ from the ESV is they take the Hebrew or Greek word or phrase and they translate the meaning of that word or phrase rather than write the closest English word for each Hebrew or Greek word. They attempt to reduce the choppy feel of the English translation that happens when the original language and English language don't work by the same rules.
If you want a best translation then I suggest you become fluent in both Hebrew and Greek. Otherwise, any English translation is going to be flawed.
I generally prefer the ESV, but I will check the ESV by reading other translations as well to see how the translators differed.

I've posted this in this thread, but as a reference, the attitude of some of us toward The Bible is influenced by our History.

Br. Jewel Smith was one of my teachers.

I worked with him and have viewed and studied all of the original Historical Bibles he carried in his collection.

He had original copies of most every Bible used to create The King James.

We have WARRED together against various heretical views that folks in our fellowships advanced (for a season...)

I am a child of God AND a child of those Saints and Ministers of God WHO PERISHED IN the FLAMES, for THEIR BELIEF in GOD.

 

[GaoLu]

Almost never, and then in pleasant ways. Social media may concentrate the more militant types in debate.

 

[Yeshua1]

This is not a translation.

A revision of a paraphrase is a piece of garbage.

The flesh and carnal thoughts of sin-cursed minds not even starting with a text that hasn't been re-worded by the flesh and carnal thoughts of sin-cursed minds is pure evil.

The Living "Bible" was not of God, as a paraphrase, and the effort to revise it and call it a 'Translation', when they admit it is not, doubles the error.

Placing a criteria of "any English translation is going to flawed", is playing right straight into the Devil's hand.

Same with, "they begin with Hebrew and Greek".

Tampered with Hebrew and Greek, like all the other Modern Bibles?

Garbage in, Garbage out.

Not of God.

By your logic, even the ole Kjv would be garbage in, garbage out!

 

[Alan Gross]

By your logic, even the ole Kjv would be garbage in, garbage out!

I do not know of any evidence that there is
garbage in, garbage out, in the ole Kjv,
and I do not believe any evidence exists.

I do not know of any evidence that 'based on my logic',
there is garbage in, garbage out, in the ole Kjv,
and I do not believe any evidence exists.
...

 

[Jerome]

[NLT] begin with Hebrew and Greek...I generally prefer the ESV

ESV is derived from the Revised Standard Version!

Preface to the English Standard Version | ESV.org

"the 1971 RSV text providing the starting point for our work"

 

[Reformed]

Social media may concentrate the more militant types in debate.

You are correct in this assessment.

 

[Alan Gross]

Westcott and Hort is wrested.

That is insane, to me, for some 'translator' to hold hands with such obviously altered diliberate carnality.

Irrational.

That goes with my premise of 'garbage', for Modern Bibles.

Their doctrinal bias colored and flavored changes to the Greek that are twisted into a Wicker rocker.

And that detract and dissuade from Divinity.

That is not what a Holy Book is all about.

Why would someone use W & H and think they were following some rule of 'translation', unless their consultation was with their flesh and an evil supernatural influence behind it?

 

[Yeshua1]

I do not know of any evidence that there is
garbage in, garbage out, in the ole Kjv,
and I do not believe any evidence exists.

I do not know of any evidence that 'based on my logic',
there is garbage in, garbage out, in the ole Kjv,
and I do not believe any evidence exists.
...

I am not saying that the KJV is garbage, but by use of your own logic, it would have to be!