Hey Rippon, I believe Van is using argumentum ad nauseam.
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!
Congratulation with your keen and faithful observations!One of my basic positions is that "word for word" translation philosophy versions (NASB95) are better for bible study then more liberal versions (ESV, NIV, NLT). Consider Revelation 13:8 where a Greek word (apo) which means out of or from or since is translated as "before." No lexicon includes that meaning as far as I know.
Next, consider 2 Thessalonians 2:13 which reads "chosen for salvation" in most versions, but some have chosen to be saved. Thus a word which is a noun in the Greek (Salvation) is turned into a verb (Saved). This allows the following "through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth" to be modifying "saved" rather than chosen (the verb in the Greek). Next consider James 2:5 where we are chosen as "poor to the world" and "rich in faith." Here, the compliment "rich in faith" further describes the condition of the chosen. However, by adding "to be" the text no longer says they were rich in faith when chosen.
Now you have lost controls.Folks, the evidence is in, many places actual words or parts of words have been omitted, many places words have been translated as if they were other words, and in many places words have been added but not italicized, so the reader is unaware that the text has been altered. The majority of well accepted translations differ with the NIV on these verses. No amount of obfuscation, slander, and subject change will alter the evidence. Folks, you are the final arbitrators, just read the evidence in light of 2 Corinthians 2:17.
1) Mark 1:41 Jesus was indignant should read "moved with anger."
2) Ephesians 2:3 deserving of wrath should read "children of wrath."
3) 2 Thess. 2:13 to be saved should read "for salvation."
4) Titus 3:4 love should read "love for mankind."
5) James 2:5 to be rich in faith should read "yet rich in faith."
6) Rev. 13:8 before should read "from"
7) Rev. 22:21 be with God's people should read "be with all."
8) 1 Timothy 3:16 appeared in the flesh should read "revealed in the flesh."
9) John 1:16 does not seem any more flawed than many other translations, what the text actually says is "And out of His abundance we all also obtained grace against grace."
10) Isaiah 12:3 the omission of the conjunction should read "therefore"
11) 2 Thess. 3:6 who is idle should read "who leads an undisciplined life"
12) Colossians 1:28 the omission of "every man" (or every person) reduces the force of the teaching that the gospel is understandable to every person.
13) Romans 3:25 sacrifice of atonement should read "propitiatory shelter."
14) 1 John 2:2 atoning sacrifice should read "propitiation."
15) 1 John 4:10 atoning sacrifice should read "propitiation."
16) Hebrews 10:14 sacrifice should read "offering."
17) Acts 13:50 "leaders" should be italicized to indicate an addition to the text.
18) 1 Corinthians 16:13 "be courageous" should read "act like men."
#176 Van, Yesterday at 10:07 PM[/INDENT]
AMEN.Lets consider 1 Peter 4:6, which reads in the NIV, "For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit."
So you want to condemn your favs --the HCSB and NET on this point? You need to be consistent Van. Or admit that you are not consistent and that you don't care.Bottom line, folks with a certain theological bias stick "now" into the text.
What you need to do is to address the specifics of my last two posts --188 and 190. Otherwise you're just blowing smoke from whatever pipe you're using.The majority of major translations disagree with the mistaken renderings in the NIV in these 19 verses.
My job is to identify your messed-up logic, double-standards, evasive tactics, lack of honor and general know-it-all-isms.this thread's topic is to identify messed up translations in the NIV.
Lets consider John 21:5. Here is how the NIV renders the verse:
He called out to them, “Friends, haven’t you any fish?”“No,” they answered.
The word the NIV rendered as "friends" actually refers to children. At Matthew 18:3 Jesus uses the same word and there the NIV renders it children. So why did the NIV choose to change words, a different Greek word means "friends."
If you insist on the literal translation at all times you will not get the meaning of some verses. That's where the skill and knowledge of translators comes into play. Is Jesus talking to children in John 21:5? No.Hi ITL, the word means children not friends. If that is too difficult, note that the NIV elsewhere translates the word as children, even when referring to adults. See 1 John 2:18. No need to try to defend the alteration of the inspired word.
These twenty examples display a systemic problem with literalness.
In this case I will have to agree with Van. The issue is not "what Jesus meant." The issue is "What did Jesus say." And He said παιδια which is a plural (all of them) neuter (regardless of gender) noun in the vocative (direct address) case. The word means "children." He often referred to his disciples as "my dear children." There is absolutely no grammatical or syntaxical warrant to translate it "friends."If you insist on the literal translation at all times you will not get the meaning of some verses. That's where the skill and knowledge of translators comes into play. Is Jesus talking to children in John 21:5? No.
It is a colloquial expression like "my boys." The aged Apostle John uses it in 1 John 2:13 and 1 John 2:18."