Question for KJVOs"like me" can we translate from.....

Glory2God: Once again let's go to Acts 2. Do you suppose all the folks that were hearing the works of God in their native tongue were hearing something less than the "Hebrew".


Each member of the audience heard the Apostles' words in his/her native tongue. Scripture is plain on that point. Common sense says that multilingual people whose range didn't include Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, or whatever language(s) the Apostles used, heard the words in their BEST language.

Today, if we were to translate a given English BV into, say, Chinese, then have someone else take that Chinese version & translate it into English, we'd then have two English versions. Yes, I agree God can cause anyone to hear His word in whatever language(s) he's caused / allowed them to learn. However, the KJVO tries to RESTRICT GOD in this, trying to confine Him to just one version. Acts 2 should serve as an example of just how WRONG this KJVO assertion is.


Your guys total lack of faith in God's ability to preserve his words is outmatched only by your willfull ignorance to who created those laguages in the first place.

Actually, your above sentence applies to the KJVO, who doesn't seem to believe God can place His word into MODERN English as well as in the English of hundreds of years ago.


How can Paul or Jesus for that matter, quote the Old Testament in Greek(when it was originaly spoken in Hebrew)and still be a perfect word for word inspired translation????????????????? "AS saith the scriptures..." It's simple!!!!

Then why does the KJVO insist God is limited to just one version? Seems as if you've created an oxymoron for yourself.

 

azguitarist

???

Your logic was to start a thread and then promise something substantive for days?

 

From their preacher who speaks the same language they do.

 

The answer has already been given. The Geneva BIBLE is the perfect Word of God. All of the MVs, from the KJV to the TNIV, pale by comparison. Stick with the Geneva Bible. If it was good enough for our forefathers, it is good enough for us.

 

Translation requires interpretation. A Greek word can mean A, B or C. The translator *assumes* it means B, then translates it as an English word that can mean B, X or Y. The English word changes over time so that 400 years later, it now means L, Y or Z. Then the translator *assumes* that the word means Z and translates it into Spanish, which can mean G or Z.

It's a dangerous proposition. The Rey Jaime translation shows the great dangers of doing a translation of a translation, rather than going straight to the source.

 

I have heard this argument before, the trouble is that it fails to take into account the time in which it was written. What takes place in Acts 2 is not translation!

This event was unique, God had not completed His revelation yet, and the Apostles had a speical gift.

 

So how would the Genevea Bible qualify in regards to the early church fathers. Didn't they precede the English language. I would rather use the same Bible they did. Wasn't the Geneva Bible about 1.5 millenia later?

 

"Today, if we were to translate a given English BV into, say, Chinese, then have someone else take that Chinese version & translate it into English, we'd then have two English versions"

__________________________________________________

This has also been applied to the Spanish language. Is this supposed to be a reason NOT to translate from English into Chinese or Thai or Spanish?

I have a question for this person. WHY would you even bother re-translating back into English. That is just plain stupid. You ALREADY have the English standard. Why take it back from the Spanish or What ever? That is stupid.

On a related note; By your SAME logic, this would also apply to the Greek. If you translate from Greek to English then from English back to Greek you end up with TWO Greek versions!

Oh WAIT! This has already happened! Only THAT time it was supposedly from Hebrew to Greek to English! Can you say LXX? LOLROFLOL

In HIS service;
Jim

 

I have seen it all... I think. LOL OK first of let me fix one problem at a time, going back to the English to Spanish to English {mis}translation,
A.Pastor Bob.
#1.The word "pastor" is perfectly translated into spanish as "pastor" {with a different pro.}. Get your dictionary. It is right. In order to Place the word and all its meaning into Spanish you must study the definitions of both of the words both in English and Spanish. You then come to a perfect UNDERSTANDING PLEASE SEE LUKE 1:3. I will speak about that later.

#2. After you have looked up both words and fully Understand BOTH WORDS and everything they mean, you then can say that the word pastor is Translated pastor {with a different pron.}

#3.Therefore because you fully understand the word pastor in English and the word pastor {see above} in Spanish- you can say they both are 2 different symbols and sounds to express the same thing or idea.

#4. Due to the fact that now has been established, you can now say,"I have perfect UNDERSTANDING OF THESE TWO WORDS.

#5.You must also consider the context. Failing to do that leads to the ludicrous {mis}translation that "pastor Bob" means Bob Shepherd. Also in the English or in Spanish You will see that "pastor" is not capital. To say that "pastor" is a name is a horrendous error simply due the way a name is written in either language. Even if it were a name-the name should have been Shepherd Bob.LOL


#6.That brings me to a simple formula>>>>>>


A=B


A=pastor in english
B=pastor in spanish{see above}

#7.To say that "pastor Bob" translates "Bob Shepherd" fails to follow any form of logic.

 

A lot of work to point out that pastor=shepherd. You could have found that in a very simple Greek word study.

 

Bro...
Pastor Bob was making a point (and IMO a valid one)...

I would ask your viewpoint/stand on this question: Are there, or are there not words extant in the English language that can not be translated directly (word-for-word correlation) into Spanish/Dutch/German/Swahili or whatever?

I would further like to give you the opportunity to defend your position, gentleman to gentleman.
As I said earlier, if I am wrong, I will willingly admit my error....But please give textual examples.

 

Please, teach me the difference in Greek.

 

I thought we were dealing with translation from the KJV to other languages?