Please tell me how it is possible, practically speaking, to have a perfect translation. What steps should I take to get there?
-
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!
KJV 2
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
Same way as we can have a perfect skin even if we have a birthmark, or a perfect piece of art, or a perfect literary work.
A translation, by being a translation, can never perfectly copy a source work. But that is inherent in all definitions.
My favorite translation of The Iliad is Fagles' translation. Granted, I have only read a handful. But in school I am pretty sure we had Lattimore's translation. (To be fair, it also could have been the time in life I enjoyed the work more).
My point is Fagles is not really a better translation than Lattimore's. I expected translations to differ because they are translations. That does not make them less perfect. Perhaps a translation emphases prose while another poetry. Maybe there is a specific theory each follows.
Can you come up with a perfect translation? Yes. How? Detail your translation philosophy, underriding theologies that may effect your decisions, and emphasize exactly what a translation is in comparison to a source text.
Perhaps your definition and explanation of perfect only confuses since it is different than what KJV-only advocates mean by their claim of perfection for the KJV and it may also be different than the meaning of perfect when used concerning the word of God in the Scriptures.
It is different from what KJO advocates consider "perfect". But I do not think it different from what Scripture means regarding the Word of Hod in the Scriptures (not even different from "dots and tittles").
Have you ever noticed that many here would reject the New Testament quoting of Scripture (KJVO guys would condemn Christ and the Apostles for their "misuse" of Scripture under their criteria, prior to the canonization of Scripture, of course).
Perhaps this goes back to what has become an antiquated debate - the nature of God's Word.
Anyway, I agree with you in part but disagree in part. Those familiar with past arguments about what constitutes the Word of God will at least pick up on the multitudes of positions (I do not hold Barth's position...before anyone goes there).
But I do believe God's Word transcends the individual word choices on a page. And I believe God's Word transcends translations (they come through, are not inhibited...i.e., man has not inadvertently conquered God). But too often I think men want to get caught up in issues rather than the message communicated.
Again, I refer to an example:
I have a fast red car.
I have a red fast car.
I have a car that's fast & red.
I have a car that's red & fast.
I have a car that can go fast & is colored red.
& so forth.
In English, we can say the same exact thing with many different words, phrases, or sentences. Thus, we have a variety of accurate translations of the same unchanging ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, or Koine Greek words, phrases, or sentences. That's part of why the KJVO myth is false. That's why "Thou shalt not steal" means the same thing as "You shall not take something that belongs to someone else with the intent of keeping it for yourself."
What matters is when the MEANING is changed between translations. For example, the KJV's "Easter" in Acts 12:4 means something different from the NKJV's "passover" in that verse. What matters is which one is CORRECT, an ACCURATE translation of the source being translated.
But just because translations differ among themselves, we cannot automatically assume one is bogus just because it doesn't match por preferred one. What matters is ACCURACY.
I have a fast red car.
I have a red fast car.
I have a car that's fast & red.
I have a car that's red & fast.
I have a car that can go fast & is colored red.
& so forth.
In English, we can say the same exact thing with many different words, phrases, or sentences. Thus, we have a variety of accurate translations of the same unchanging ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, or Koine Greek words, phrases, or sentences. That's part of why the KJVO myth is false. That's why "Thou shalt not steal" means the same thing as "You shall not take something that belongs to someone else with the intent of keeping it for yourself."
What matters is when the MEANING is changed between translations. For example, the KJV's "Easter" in Acts 12:4 means something different from the NKJV's "passover" in that verse. What matters is which one is CORRECT, an ACCURATE translation of the source being translated.
But just because translations differ among themselves, we cannot automatically assume one is bogus just because it doesn't match por preferred one. What matters is ACCURACY.
Well said!
Part of the problem is the definition. What is a perfect translation? Are we talking about one-to-one semantic correspondence? Impossible as you know. Complete semantic correspondence? Also impossible.
This is all well and good, but have you talked to my proofreaders?
I'm very nervous about what Dr. K. (a Japanese NASA scientist) is going to do to our Philippians. Plus, in going through Revelation, I note that Miss M made the trenchant observation that we used a different Japanese word in that book for oinos (οἰνος) there, so now we have to decide which to go with and correct the rest of the NT.My point is that the NT in Greek is so complicated and long that it would take a series of perhaps 1000s of miracles to get it completely perfect, whatever definition is used. But KJV-Only folk never chronicle a single miracle in the perfecting of the translation.
I have time now to answer this in more detail.
This route is sometimes suggested by those who do not know a foreign language and have never done any translation work. Some years ago I wrote a negative Amazon review of Word-For-Word Translation of the Received Texts, by H. D. Williams. The man took umbrage, and attacked me personally here, and you are welcome to read it: Word-For-Word Translating
I noted that Williams admittedly did not know a foreign language, did not know the original Greek or Hebrew of the Bible, had never done translation work. Yet he saw fit to write a book telling us translators how to translate. I ask you: are you fluent in a foreign language? Do you know the Greek and Hebrew? Do you have any experience in translating? Have you ever helped on a translation? I don't mean to be unkind here, but if you answered no to all of these, what qualifies you to write a book on Bible translation?
Is the process duplicable? If not, why not? Does God love English speaking people more than the Japanese? "For God so loved the world."
I kind of thought you would say something like this. Using a translation of the original text as the source text is very problematic. I have taught NT Greek for many years, so our translation is directly from the TR (with reference to the KJV). We do not need to do a translation of a translation. But you are not answering my questions. The path you state here will not lead to a perfect translation. Ask Nadine if she has proofreaders. If she does, that is proof that she does not have a perfect translation. If she does not, her translation will be full of errors.
This route is sometimes suggested by those who do not know a foreign language and have never done any translation work. Some years ago I wrote a negative Amazon review of Word-For-Word Translation of the Received Texts, by H. D. Williams. The man took umbrage, and attacked me personally here, and you are welcome to read it: Word-For-Word Translating
I noted that Williams admittedly did not know a foreign language, did not know the original Greek or Hebrew of the Bible, had never done translation work. Yet he saw fit to write a book telling us translators how to translate. I ask you: are you fluent in a foreign language? Do you know the Greek and Hebrew? Do you have any experience in translating? Have you ever helped on a translation? I don't mean to be unkind here, but if you answered no to all of these, what qualifies you to write a book on Bible translation?
At the time those inspired verses in the Psalms were written in Hebrew, there was no such thing as a Bible translation in existence. So I don't buy your exegesis. The verses are not talking about translations. If they were, they would apply to our Japanese version as easily as to the KJV.
Well of course He is able. My question is, if the KJV is perfect, how did it happen? At what point did the miracles (many of them required) occur to make it a perfect translation? First draft? Second draft? (None of those English manuscripts are extant, though.) Proofreading? Printing? Revision?
Is the process duplicable? If not, why not? Does God love English speaking people more than the Japanese? "For God so loved the world."
Michael Hollner
Active Member
First of all let me say I think it is a wonderful thing that you are doing in giving the Japanese people the Word of God in their own tongue. But being that I am not on your translation committee, I cannot answer all your questions regarding this for I would need more information on your process.
What sources are you using for their text? Is it the KJV and the T.R? Which is primary? Are you consulting any critical text readings? Is your translation team going forward with a theological presupposition that the KJV has flaws? Do you BELIEVE you have a perfect standard to use for your translation? Do the Japanese need to incorporate any English words that is not in their language?
Is there a fear of God in omitting any of God’s Word’s that your team may be held accountable for? (Rev 22:18-19) KJV. Is there any fasting to go along with the prayer? Are their any unbelievers involved on the committee? (Romans 3:2) KJV. How many team members are fluent in both English and Japanese from their youth, learning both languages as a child?
I guess if I were on the committee team my biggest concern would be how it would be possible to give the Japanese people a perfect Word of God if nobody believed we have a perfect Word of God to go by today in 2021, a pure source. The originals are long gone, and any hopes of giving people the words of what the Apostles actually said, is to believe by faith in the promises of preservation that God has indeed preserved those originals for us today, even in a translation.
Nadine with her French translation of the KJV is very close to the 100% mark but (to my knowledge back in 2018), it is still in the 99% range just as the T.R. editions are to this day. The T.R. editions are pure as gold, but even gold is 99.99% pure and has 0.01% that still needs refining but it is not cost productive industry-wise to bring it to such and, some say it ends up transparent at this point. An example of the TR being 99% pure is in Luke 2:22 where the T.R. of Stephanus reads ‘their purification’ but the T.R of Beza corrected it with ‘her purification’ which is doctrinally correct according to the law of Moses. However, even if Beza had not corrected it, the KJV translators would have. The point is, we must always consult the context of the scripture which would clear up many textual issues, especially when critical text readings contradict clear doctrine such as in John 1:18 in the NASB. I believe any foreign translation that consults any critical text readings will be a failure right out of the gate. That would be going to Egypt for help rather than Antioch (Isaiah 31:1; Acts 11:26) KJV and the pure line of texts.
The KJV is that 100% Gold that has been perfected through God’s refining process. I am not sure how any translation team could be successful if that faith in God’s Word is not the foundation going forward without a standard and solid foundation to go by (Psalms 11:2) KJV.
If I were on a translation team, these are the concerns I would bring up at the table. Even as a KJV believer, for me personally, if I were to translate the Word of God into any foreign tongue, I would not even start the process without seeking God in fasting and prayer quite often, along with all the members of the team for “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 9:10) KJV. Me personally, I would consider it something that I will have to answer to God for in the day of judgment in knowing that “it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31) KJV.
In knowing that God Himself has said, “for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name” (Psalms 138:2) KJV, I would make sure I have the right source as in the KJV to do the translating in light of how serious God takes His Word.
I would also consult the team and make sure nobody fits the bill of ‘despising’ the right ‘book’ and has spiritual discernment of the signs of the times, and how God gave us His Word in reformation times in the present universal language of ENGLISH, as the standard for the end times we are approaching (Isaiah 30:8-15; Acts 13:40-41) KJV. “But ye said, No….” (Isaiah 30:16) KJV. I would make sure the team all says, ‘Yes.’
God bless you in your efforts and your team is in my prayers.
May God use your team as he did the KJV translators for understanding, for “there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding” (Job 32:8) KJV.
When will your N.T. translation be complete?
P.S. I just read your latest response as I was posting this so I will try to respond.
Last edited:
Michael Hollner
Active Member
[QUOTE="John of Japan, post: 2706188, member: 5820"]I have time now to answer this in more detail.
"Well of course He is able. My question is, if the KJV is perfect, how did it happen? At what point did the miracles (many of them required) occur to make it a perfect translation? First draft? Second draft? (None of those English manuscripts are extant, though.) Proofreading? Printing? Revision?
Is the process duplicable? If not, why not? Does God love English speaking people more than the Japanese? "For God so loved the world."
Your asking rhetorical questions.
I could ask why did God wait 4000 years to send Jesus Christ? Which revision of the book of Jeremiah was perfect, the second one after King Jehoiakim burned the “original” manuscripts in the fire? Or was it the third copy after the second copy was thrown in the river Euphrates in Jeremiah 36:1-31; 51:59-64?
If the KJV is not a perfectly preserved copy of the originals, then when did the preservation end? Second century? Third? When did God stop any preservation of the inspired Scriptures?
If the KJV is not perfect, when did not perfection end? Where is the last perfect copy of God's Word? When did God stop performing miracles regarding the Scriptures? Is there anything in Scripture that God has at least told us about to expect His Word was perfect in the originals, but that not to expect any perfection in the year 2021, for they are long gone?
When you say 'proofreading' what do you mean? Can you clarify this?
You said "Using a translation of the original text as the source text is very problematic. I have taught NT Greek for many years, so our translation is directly from the TR (with reference to the KJV). We do not need to do a translation of a translation.
Then why not use the KJV English of which the KJV translators already did the tough work of translating the TR into English?
If you are not going to translate a translation of a translation, then how are you going to translate in light that the Greek TR is problematic? I am sure you would agree that the KJV translators were among the greatest scholars the world has ever known, and many of them were true men of God. Why not utilize their efforts in your own efforts?
In the craft of modern textual criticism they are trying to 'restore' something that has already been 'preserved,' of which consists of the impossible task of "attempting to ascertain the original wording of the original text" when there is no such thing as the 'original text' and never will be.
Blessings....
"Well of course He is able. My question is, if the KJV is perfect, how did it happen? At what point did the miracles (many of them required) occur to make it a perfect translation? First draft? Second draft? (None of those English manuscripts are extant, though.) Proofreading? Printing? Revision?
Is the process duplicable? If not, why not? Does God love English speaking people more than the Japanese? "For God so loved the world."
Your asking rhetorical questions.
I could ask why did God wait 4000 years to send Jesus Christ? Which revision of the book of Jeremiah was perfect, the second one after King Jehoiakim burned the “original” manuscripts in the fire? Or was it the third copy after the second copy was thrown in the river Euphrates in Jeremiah 36:1-31; 51:59-64?
If the KJV is not a perfectly preserved copy of the originals, then when did the preservation end? Second century? Third? When did God stop any preservation of the inspired Scriptures?
If the KJV is not perfect, when did not perfection end? Where is the last perfect copy of God's Word? When did God stop performing miracles regarding the Scriptures? Is there anything in Scripture that God has at least told us about to expect His Word was perfect in the originals, but that not to expect any perfection in the year 2021, for they are long gone?
When you say 'proofreading' what do you mean? Can you clarify this?
You said "Using a translation of the original text as the source text is very problematic. I have taught NT Greek for many years, so our translation is directly from the TR (with reference to the KJV). We do not need to do a translation of a translation.
Then why not use the KJV English of which the KJV translators already did the tough work of translating the TR into English?
If you are not going to translate a translation of a translation, then how are you going to translate in light that the Greek TR is problematic? I am sure you would agree that the KJV translators were among the greatest scholars the world has ever known, and many of them were true men of God. Why not utilize their efforts in your own efforts?
In the craft of modern textual criticism they are trying to 'restore' something that has already been 'preserved,' of which consists of the impossible task of "attempting to ascertain the original wording of the original text" when there is no such thing as the 'original text' and never will be.
Blessings....
Last edited:
I hope to be able to answer your other post later today. Don't have time right now--have to judge some competitions in our academy.
I teach first year Greek in our college, and Bible translation in our seminary, where we offer an MA in the subject. I teach that we believers are responsible for preservation on the earth. God has His Word settled in Heaven (Ps. 119:89), but we on earth are responsible to preserve God's Word in all the languages of the world (as in the Great Commission, for just one example). Translation is a human process, though directed by the Holy Spirit, so it is seldom miraculous.
if you had done any translating at all, you would know that in the world of the translator, the originals are always authoritative. In the secular skopos theory, for example, the translator is responsible to the original author to be faithful to the text, the degree of faithfulness depending on the nature of the original/
Ask your friend doing a French translation if she has proofreaders. If not, there will be many such errors in her translation. I'm assuming she's got the good sense to have it well proofread, though.
Not in my mind. What I am asking is real, practical questions that have immediate relevance to my work.
Preservation still has not ended. God continues to preserve His Word to this very day through believers all over the world. Your examples from Jeremiah are of Spirit led human preservation of the Scriptu4es.
I teach first year Greek in our college, and Bible translation in our seminary, where we offer an MA in the subject. I teach that we believers are responsible for preservation on the earth. God has His Word settled in Heaven (Ps. 119:89), but we on earth are responsible to preserve God's Word in all the languages of the world (as in the Great Commission, for just one example). Translation is a human process, though directed by the Holy Spirit, so it is seldom miraculous.
Well, the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts are perfect, of course. That is how God has preserved His Word, in the languages in which He inspired it. I'm very content with the original texts we are using (Scrivener & Masoretic), and would not change a word in them. If you say we have no original manuscripts of these languages, that's a non-starter to prove your point. The very obvious answer is, where are the original, hand-written English mss of the KJV?
if you had done any translating at all, you would know that in the world of the translator, the originals are always authoritative. In the secular skopos theory, for example, the translator is responsible to the original author to be faithful to the text, the degree of faithfulness depending on the nature of the original/
It is exactly what you think it is: finding the errors in a document and correcting them. In this case, my Japanese proof readers find things we have missed in the semantics, syntax, furigana (ruby reading marks), layout, concordance, etc.
Ask your friend doing a French translation if she has proofreaders. If not, there will be many such errors in her translation. I'm assuming she's got the good sense to have it well proofread, though.
Last edited:
Sorry, Captain, but the KJV has its share of goofs & booboos, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4. And it has ADDED words, such as "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5 (Betcha can't show us any ancient Greek ms. of Revelation that has those words in that verse!)
And a translation of a translation is always inferior to a translation of original sources. Thus, a translation of the KJV into French will be inferior to a French translation made from the ancient Scriptural mss.
Michael Hollner
Active Member
The King James translators translated the Greek word “pascha” as “Passover” 28 times in the New Testament and you honestly think the 29th time, they made a mistake and somehow produced the word Easter like a rabbit out of a hat? Perhaps you should have been on the translation committee and corrected 47 of the best scholars the world has ever known.
Even the liberal scholar Philip Schaff (1819-1893) stated, “Easter is the Resurrection festival which follows the Passover proper, but is included in the same festive week.”
Read your context in Acts 12:3 and study Exodus 12:13-18; Leviticus 23:5-6 Numbers 28:16-18; Deuteronomy 16:1-8; Joshua 5:10-11; II Chronicles 30:15; 21; Ezra 6:19; 22. The Passover precedes the 'days of unleavened bread."
Herod arrested Peter and verse three says it was during “the days of unleavened bread” (Acts 12:3). Anyone who knows Jewish feasts and days realizes that the Passover is a 24-hour period, and after the Passover comes “the days of unleavened bread” for seven days. Thus once again the KJV is superior to all translations in using the correct word Easter.
Blessings.....
Same question can apply to Kent and David, as did to Glenn. Can we assert positively from either the Bible or a dictionary that their definition of preservation is correct?
(As far as dictionaries are concerned, we can find a range of meaning for preservation, so we ultimately will have to go beyond that method.)
Nice try, but incorrect1
First, pick up your KJV & read Ezekiel 45;21 to see that GOD HIMSELF said passover is SEVEN DAYS LONG. Then, turn to John 18:28 to see the men who busted Jesus didn't enter the Roman Praetorium lest they become ceremonially defiled & thus prohibited from EATING THE PASSOVER. (Bear in mind that the paschal lambs had been eaten THE PREVIOUS EVENING !)
And EASTER DIDN'T EXIST when Luke wrote "Acts". And even if it had existed then, neither Herod nor the Jews he was trying to please would've left off dealing with Peter to have observed it.
Evidence exists that it was a prelate, or prelates who replaced passover with Easter in the KJV. And that's only one of many goofs in the KJV.
I await your answer to the problem of the ADDED WORDS in the KJV's Rev. 16:5.
When referring to word preservation [exact word preservation] which is what KJV-only advocates or KJV defenders claim that the Scriptures teach, this definition of preservation would be correct.
Would KJV-only advocates suggest that Bible preservation refers only to "meaning preservation" or "dynamic equivalent preservation"?
Perfection as used by the KJVO would though mean exact copy of what was recorded down in the originals!
Michael Hollner
Active Member
For proper interpretation, Ezekiel 45:21 “must be” (Isaiah 28:10) used in conjunction with Exodus 12:13-18; Leviticus 23:5-6; Numbers 28:16-18; Deuteronomy 16:1-8; Joshua 5:10-11; II Chronicles 30:15; 21; Ezra 6:19; 22, and dozens of other verses. Good try. I suggest studying Isaiah 28:9-13. But please know, only the KJV reveals the proper interpretation of Scripture in those 5 verses.
Now as to the terminology of the Passover and the seven-day feast. We use the same manner of speech today. We call Easter (the one day of Easter) Easter week, or as in the retail business world, they call the 24-hour “one” day of Christmas, “Christmas week.” CNBC says, “Thanksgiving week is usually a very good week for stocks.” Is Thanksgiving Day a 7-day week, or a one 24-hour day? You are obviously not allowing the context of the other Scriptures to help you in understanding just one or two verses, and you do not understand the terminology in context with the other verses, a hermeneutics 101 failure. No one verse of Scripture can be given a private interpretation (II Peter 1:20) KJV.
As far as Revelation 16:5. You mean the verse that only has 4 pre-10th century Greek manuscripts in your favor and 2 Latin pre-10th century manuscripts (commentary-witnesses) that favors the KJV? Argument of silence. Once again, you fail to read the context of Scriptures showing Revelation 16:5 matches Revelation 1:4, 8; 4:8; and 11:17. The KJV is consistent! But if you want further evidence I will refer you to Nick Sayers who actually wrote a whole book on just this one verse at https://www.thebookstall.com/book/9781733331586
Blessings……
Last edited:
Thank you. I feel truly blessed to be a Bible translator.
What I asked for was general principles on how a missionary Bible translation can be perfect, as you say the KJV is. If you wish to, you could use the KJV to explain. As I asked before, at what point do you believe the KJV became perfect: first draft, second draft, proofreading, printing, revision? This should not be hard to answer.
Our translation is in Japanese from the Scrivener TR. Why then should we use the KJV? Oh, yes, we referred to it, but neither language we work in is English. And no, Japanese do not need to incorporate any English words. Why would they? It's a 1st world country with a well-attested language and a history of prior Bible translations.
As to whether or not the KJV has flaws, that is pretty much irrelevant to the typical missionary translation, but I will point out one flaw. Remember that Japan is an extremely idolatrous nation. So what should we do with the KJV rendering of Ex. 22:28 "Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people"? I have often reviled the false gods of Buddhism and Shintoism, yet the KJV tells me not to. In fact, the KJV reviles false gods over and over. So should I translate that verse literally from the KJV into Japanese when I get to Exodus?
I find this advice to be odd. I'll ask again if you know any foreign languages fluently, if you know the Greek and/or Hebrew, if you have ever actually translated anything. If the answer to these questions are "No," you have no standing whatsoever to give advice to a missionary translator. For a person to qualify for our MA in Bible translation, they must be fluent in a foreign language, and know or learn Greek (at least 3 semesters) and Hebrew (2 semesters). Would you qualify? (This is a serious query.)
As for myself: I served the Lord 33 years in Japan, am a graduate of the two year program of the Tokyo School of the Japanese Language, and have 19 credits of training in Greek, which I have taught in two languages; I've also studied Hebrew, of course, but my son teaches that.
I did the base translation, then was joined by "Uncle Miya" Miyakawa for the second draft. Many other Japanese and missionary linguists have contributed along the way, especially Bro. S. who is doing the final editing and formatting. I have a great team of Japanese proofreaders, including Pastor Takahashi (for John, esp.), two Japanese ladies, Dr. K (a Japanese NASA scientist).
Who are Nadine's proofreaders?
My biggest concern is not any of this, but to accurately and completely translate. If we translated the Word of God correctly, He will handle the rest.
If I were to stand up before a Japanese congregation with our NT, I would confidently preach from it as the Word of God that it is. It was translated from a pure source--but not the KJV.
How do you know these things about the French translation? Do you speak French fluently?
I'll try again. You keep saying the KJV is perfect, "pure gold," or whatever. By what process did it get there? If you can't tell me that, your view is completely unhelpful to a missionary translator.
Ours is the first ever Japanese NT from the TR in modern Japanese. There was a previous NT translated by a Japanese pastor into classical Japanese (very hard to understand) in the 1930's from Stephanus, but we are using Scrivener.
Thanks for asking. We have finished the entire NT and are in the proofreading stage, with a little bit of revision thrown in as needed. God willing, it will be printed this year. Uncle Miya, my co-translator, is now in Heaven, no doubt smiling down on us as we work, and learning all of the idioms of the Heavenly language, whatever that might be.
No context necessary. God gave His message to Zeke years after he gave the others you mentioned. He said passover is SEVEN DAYS LONG. Your argument for otherwise is with GOD, not I.
Only in your incorrect KJVO viewpoint. In fact, several modern versions render them BETTER.
You completely ignore John 18:28, which I cited. You like using verses in conjunction with others? Well, John 18:28 is in conjunction with Eze. 45:21.
As far as Revelation 16:5. You mean the verse that only has 4 pre-10th century Greek manuscripts in your favor and 2 Latin pre-10th century manuscripts (commentary-witnesses) that favors the KJV? Argument of silence. Once again, you fail to read the context of Scriptures showing Revelation 16:5 matches Revelation 1:4, 8; 4:8; and 11:17. The KJV is consistent! But if you want further evidence I will refer you to Nick Sayers who actually wrote a whole book on just this one verse at https://www.thebookstall.com/book/9781733331586
Context has nothing to do with the FACT that those words are NOT in ANY known ancient GREEK mss. of Rev. While doctrinally correct, of course, those words are simply NOT in the old mss!
But I can tell you where they came from. The KJV almost-exclusively used the Textus Receptus, Beza's version, for its New testament text. Well, Beza made a "conjectural emendation" & ADDED those words to his TR revision. The AV men blindly followed that document, without checking the mss. from which it was made. They followed Beza, not the ancient writers of those mss. Now, until you can show us an ANCIENT GREEK MS of Rev containing those words at that verse, they stand as ADDED words to the KJV, being further proof the KJV isn't perfect. (And there are many more goofs in it, but we'll just do two at a time, as you haven't gotten past them, yet.)
Same to YOU! Stick around long enough, & perhaps we, or the HOLY SPIRIT, will break your thralldom to the Satan-invented, man-made, totally-false KJVO myth.
Michael Hollner
Active Member
Thank you. I feel truly blessed to be a Bible translator.
What I asked for was general principles on how a missionary Bible translation can be perfect, as you say the KJV is. If you wish to, you could use the KJV to explain. As I asked before, at what point do you believe the KJV became perfect: first draft, second draft, proofreading, printing, revision? This should not be hard to answer.
Our translation is in Japanese from the Scrivener TR. Why then should we use the KJV? Oh, yes, we referred to it, but neither language we work in is English. And no, Japanese do not need to incorporate any English words. Why would they? It's a 1st world country with a well-attested language and a history of prior Bible translations.
As to whether or not the KJV has flaws, that is pretty much irrelevant to the typical missionary translation, but I will point out one flaw. Remember that Japan is an extremely idolatrous nation. So what should we do with the KJV rendering of Ex. 22:28 "Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people"? I have often reviled the false gods of Buddhism and Shintoism, yet the KJV tells me not to. In fact, the KJV reviles false gods over and over. So should I translate that verse literally from the KJV into Japanese when I get to Exodus?
I find this advice to be odd. I'll ask again if you know any foreign languages fluently, if you know the Greek and/or Hebrew, if you have ever actually translated anything. If the answer to these questions are "No," you have no standing whatsoever to give advice to a missionary translator. For a person to qualify for our MA in Bible translation, they must be fluent in a foreign language, and know or learn Greek (at least 3 semesters) and Hebrew (2 semesters). Would you qualify? (This is a serious query.)
As for myself: I served the Lord 33 years in Japan, am a graduate of the two year program of the Tokyo School of the Japanese Language, and have 19 credits of training in Greek, which I have taught in two languages; I've also studied Hebrew, of course, but my son teaches that.
I did the base translation, then was joined by "Uncle Miya" Miyakawa for the second draft. Many other Japanese and missionary linguists have contributed along the way, especially Bro. S. who is doing the final editing and formatting. I have a great team of Japanese proofreaders, including Pastor Takahashi (for John, esp.), two Japanese ladies, Dr. K (a Japanese NASA scientist).
Who are Nadine's proofreaders?
My biggest concern is not any of this, but to accurately and completely translate. If we translated the Word of God correctly, He will handle the rest.
If I were to stand up before a Japanese congregation with our NT, I would confidently preach from it as the Word of God that it is. It was translated from a pure source--but not the KJV.
How do you know these things about the French translation? Do you speak French fluently?
I'll try again. You keep saying the KJV is perfect, "pure gold," or whatever. By what process did it get there? If you can't tell me that, your view is completely unhelpful to a missionary translator.
Ours is the first ever Japanese NT from the TR in modern Japanese. There was a previous NT translated by a Japanese pastor into classical Japanese (very hard to understand) in the 1930's from Stephanus, but we are using Scrivener.
Thanks for asking. We have finished the entire NT and are in the proofreading stage, with a little bit of revision thrown in as needed. God willing, it will be printed this year. Uncle Miya, my co-translator, is now in Heaven, no doubt smiling down on us as we work, and learning all of the idioms of the Heavenly language, whatever that might be.
Ex. 22:28 "Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people"? I have often reviled the false gods of Buddhism and Shintoism, yet the KJV tells me not to. In fact, the KJV reviles false gods over and over. So should I translate that verse literally from the KJV into Japanese when I get to Exodus?
Yes, I believe it should be translated word for word. In context, Paul referred to this verse in Acts 23:5 relating it to the High Priest and rulers. In other contexts “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” is also commanded (Exodus 20:3) KJV. This is where I think some translations run into problems by compromising the truth with trying to justify changing the Word which God forbids. Wycliffe translators were involved with removing the “Father” and replacing it with “Allah” as to not offend the Muslims. I think this is dangerous ground. You and I know in the context of Scripture that preaching against false gods is not forbidden if you compile the entire Scriptures and not give one verse a private interpretation. I’d be curious how you would translate Isaiah 28:9-13 in Japanese. Are their plans for an O.T.?
‘you have no standing whatsoever to give advice to a missionary translator.”
Perhaps not according you’re your prerequisites. You asked me some questions and I am responding with heart-felt answers from God’s Word. As a minister myself, I have every right to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3) for our foundation of faith is the Word of God (Psalms 11:2) KJV. I am not here trying to ‘straighten you out,’ but rather have civil dialogue in the ‘spirit of meekness” (Gal 6:1) KJV. I am thrilled you are using any TR edition and hope it comes out as close to the KJV as possible. If I knew Japanese from my childhood along with my English, then I feel I would qualify, for the Greek and Hebrew effort has already been done by the greatest scholars the world has ever known (or ever will). Where I feel I qualify is within the context of the criteria I laid out which is Biblical. I know we agree to disagree on the Greek and Hebrew end, but I feel it is a step backward.
‘How do you know these things about the French translation? Do you speak French fluently?’
I have been in communication with a Pastor who works side by side with Nadine and has been a part of the process from the beginning and I am telling you what he has told me. I have had similar conversations with Steve (I believe that is his name) at “Global Bible Translations” to give the Chinese a pure text. Their web site bpsglobal.org, currently has the Gospel of John and the book of Romans translated, as they claim they are using the T.R. as a pure source also. But between you, Steve, and Nadine, I believe Nadine is the only one that uses the KJV as primary and relies much less on the Greek. I know we agree to disagree on that.
I'll try again. You keep saying the KJV is perfect, "pure gold," or whatever. By what process did it get there? If you can't tell me that, your view is completely unhelpful to a missionary translator.
I got there from the Scriptures. Also, you and I were not alive these last 2000 years so this is a rhetorical question as I brough up before. But a few verses that have helped me over the years as far a God preserving His Word, its purity, its divine inspiration, inerrancy, and other attributes are listed below.
Exodus 3:15, Exodus 34:1-4, Deuteronomy 4:2, II Kings 10:10; 22:8, Job 19:23-24, Job 32:8, Nehemiah 8:1-18, Psalms 12:6-7, Psalms 19:7-9, Psalms 33:11, Psalms 68:11, Psalms 89:34, Psalms 100:5, Psalms 105:8, Psalms 119:160, Psalms 119:89, Psalms 119:140, Psalms 119:152, Psalms 135:13, Psalms 138:2, Proverbs 22:12, Proverbs 30:5-6, Ecclesiastes 3:14, Isaiah 8:16;20, Isaiah 30:8, Isaiah 34:16-17, Isaiah 40:8, Isaiah 55:11, Jer 36:1-32, Jer 51:60-63, Daniel 10:21, Zechariah 7:12 Malachi 3:6, Matthew 5:18, Matthew 24:35, Luke 4:17-21, Luke 16:17, Luke 24:25-27, Luke 24:32, Luke 24:44-49 John 1:1, John 5:38-39, John 10:35, Acts 8:26-40, Acts 17:2-3, Acts 17:11, Romans 15:4, I Cor 10:11, Galatians 3:8, II Tim 3:15-16, II Tim 4:13, I Peter 1:23, I Peter 1:25, II Peter 1:19-21, James 1:25, Rev 22:18-19.
Blessings....
Do you live permanently in Japan or ever visit the states on furlough?
- Status