So what is 'preservation'?

[Wally]

If you don't rely on the humility or understanding of men, I find it rather droll that you're asking me.

Very well. I have quite strong views on Bible translations and certainly some are better than others. I do have a knowledge of Koine Greek (not Hebrew) and it has led me to the view that no translation is perfect. If there is a perfect version of the Bible, it resides in the original languages. Some translations are better than others. For example I am confident that the NKJV is better than the KJV for a variety of reasons.
I was saved using the 1987 NIV, but I do not now believe that it is a particularly good translation (though better than its replacement). I am now an elder in a small church in the UK and my Pastor likes to use the 1984 NIV, I do not wish to divide my church, so when I preach, I do so from that version, knowing that if it was good enough to save me, it will be good enough to save others.
I am also a member of Gideons UK and they also use the NIV 1984, and indeed are changing (much to my chagrin) to the 2011 version. I have serious reservations about 'Gender Neutral' Bibles, but I believe, along with the Puritans, that the Lord is able to draw a straight line with a bent stick. Gideon Bibles are not intended for serious Bible study, but for unbelievers to read, and I believe that the NIV 2011 is well able, if God wills, to save sinners. However, if my Pastor wants to use it in our church, he will have a fight on his hands!
I hope that perhaps that will explain one or two things.

Are you of the opinion that the various versions you reference (as well as others) are very close in content. That they don't conflict with one another and the same doctrine can be derived from all of them? If not, how do you decide what God's preserved Word is?

 

[John of Japan]

"Salvation is certainly a miracle"..."it is not providential". How is it unlike describing preservation as miracle? Are you saying you 'see' someone being born again? Sorry, still confused.

I have seen many be born again. Haven't you ever seen the light of the Lord come upon someone who has just trusted Christ as Savior? I have. It is observable. To clarify, though, providence has a part in a person's salvation, like when Missionary D. and I met the yakuza gangster while doing dendo (evangelism) downtown. He later trusted Christ as Savior along with two of his gang of drug pushers. The original meeting was providential, but the salvation was a true miracle!

Providence, on the other hand, is a theological term describing how God orders all things for good. The clearest Bible statement of this is, of course, Rom. 8:28--"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."

It is not possible to interpret this verse as meaning there is a process to a miracle. Again, a miracle is an event, like the feeding of the 5,000. Providence is a process, like how God put me in Japan:
1. I was called to be a missionary as a college sophomore.
2. I prayed for 4 years about Hong Kong.
3. God put a missionary to Japan behind my parents at my graduation. He then asked me to pray about working with him.
4. I did pray, and God revealed His will for me in my private devotions from Rom. 10:14-15.
5. A mission board accepted me, and I did deputation, arriving in Japan by God's grace in May of 1980.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, the most conservative Japanese Bible. The only previous translation from the TR was only the NT, and it was in classical Japanese, very hard to read. Seems like Wally and Dave Gilbert would rejoice that I was involved in getting a TR based translation to the Japanese, but apparently not.

They would have liked it better if you had translated off from the Kjv itself!

 

[Yeshua1]

If you don't rely on the humility or understanding of men, I find it rather droll that you're asking me.

Very well. I have quite strong views on Bible translations and certainly some are better than others. I do have a knowledge of Koine Greek (not Hebrew) and it has led me to the view that no translation is perfect. If there is a perfect version of the Bible, it resides in the original languages. Some translations are better than others. For example I am confident that the NKJV is better than the KJV for a variety of reasons.
I was saved using the 1987 NIV, but I do not now believe that it is a particularly good translation (though better than its replacement). I am now an elder in a small church in the UK and my Pastor likes to use the 1984 NIV, I do not wish to divide my church, so when I preach, I do so from that version, knowing that if it was good enough to save me, it will be good enough to save others.
I am also a member of Gideons UK and they also use the NIV 1984, and indeed are changing (much to my chagrin) to the 2011 version. I have serious reservations about 'Gender Neutral' Bibles, but I believe, along with the Puritans, that the Lord is able to draw a straight line with a bent stick. Gideon Bibles are not intended for serious Bible study, but for unbelievers to read, and I believe that the NIV 2011 is well able, if God wills, to save sinners. However, if my Pastor wants to use it in our church, he will have a fight on his hands!
I hope that perhaps that will explain one or two things.

I

If you don't rely on the humility or understanding of men, I find it rather droll that you're asking me.

Very well. I have quite strong views on Bible translations and certainly some are better than others. I do have a knowledge of Koine Greek (not Hebrew) and it has led me to the view that no translation is perfect. If there is a perfect version of the Bible, it resides in the original languages. Some translations are better than others. For example I am confident that the NKJV is better than the KJV for a variety of reasons.
I was saved using the 1987 NIV, but I do not now believe that it is a particularly good translation (though better than its replacement). I am now an elder in a small church in the UK and my Pastor likes to use the 1984 NIV, I do not wish to divide my church, so when I preach, I do so from that version, knowing that if it was good enough to save me, it will be good enough to save others.
I am also a member of Gideons UK and they also use the NIV 1984, and indeed are changing (much to my chagrin) to the 2011 version. I have serious reservations about 'Gender Neutral' Bibles, but I believe, along with the Puritans, that the Lord is able to draw a straight line with a bent stick. Gideon Bibles are not intended for serious Bible a great translation! study, but for unbelievers to read, and I believe that the NIV 2011 is well able, if God wills, to save sinners. However, if my Pastor wants to use it in our church, he will have a fight on his hands!
I hope that perhaps that will explain one or two things.

I feel same way about the Nas, as still have the 1977 edition of it, tried 1995 revision, did not like it as much, and 2020 revision looks like going more inclusive language, so spoiling a great translation!

 

[Wally]

It's a complicated subject.


Sorry for missing your question.

Sorry for your frustration, also. But it is a very complicated subject, and many do the Word of God an injustice when they try to simplify it. (Not saying that you are.) I've studied the subject since preparing for our first furlough from Japan in 1985, and am still learning. At that time I came up with a 19 page outline.

1. God's Word is forever settled in Heaven.
Ps. 119:89. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

2. On earth, God preserves His Word through providence--in other words through human actions that He guides. I know of no earthly miracles recorded showing forth the preservation of God's Word. Can you tell me of one?
a. "Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshipeth thee" (Neh. 9:6).
b. "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or power: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist" (Col. 1:16-17).
c. One of God's names is "Preserver" (2 Sam 22:3, Job 7:20).

3. We humans are responsible for the preservation of God's Word on earth.
In the OT, the priests were keepers of God's Word, the Law. We are priests in the NT age, so we are to preserve the Word.
Compare:
Mal. 2:7. "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts."
1 Peter 2:5. "Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." (And other passages.)

4. As a believer, I am working to be God's servant in the earthly preservation of Scripture.
Matt. 28:20. "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you."
Jer. 50:2. "Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not." (And many other passages.)

Let me try it a different way...If was was to have a different understanding of, say...soteriology than you and I asked you 'where did you get your understanding of this topic?' ...what would answer?

 

[John of Japan]

Let me try it a different way...If was was to have a different understanding of, say...soteriology than you and I asked you 'where did you get your understanding of this topic?' ...what would answer?

From the Bible, is that the answer you want? I might use the KJV to study. I might use the TR or the Byz. Textform. I might use the Hebrew OT.... Don't know what you are fishing for here.

 

[Wally]

From the Bible, is that the answer you want? I might use the KJV to study. I might use the TR or the Byz. Textform. I might use the Hebrew OT.... Don't know what you are fishing for here.

Perfect, yes that is basically what I was looking for. So, with the diversity of your selection there, are you with those on here that seem to be claiming there is no appreciable difference between all of those...or do you have a way of determining which is correct when they appear to conflict?

 

[Yeshua1]

Perfect, yes that is basically what I was looking for. So, with the diversity of your selection there, are you with those on here that seem to be claiming there is no appreciable difference between all of those...or do you have a way of determining which is correct when they appear to conflict?

That answer will all depend on how one views the accuracy of the underlining original languages texts being used for translation!

 

[John of Japan]

Perfect, yes that is basically what I was looking for. So, with the diversity of your selection there, are you with those on here that seem to be claiming there is no appreciable difference between all of those...or do you have a way of determining which is correct when they appear to conflict?

I have examined the KJV NT in comparison to the TR, and can say that yes, sometimes they conflict. I have examined some of the KJV OT in reference to the Hebrew OT, and sometimes they differ. But the authority rests in the originals, not in any translation. This is a basic fact which any translator of any kind will tell you (except Jacques Derrida the deconstructionist). This can be proven from the Bible itself, because there are many places in the Bible where it translates itself, giving priority to the original.

The various Greek NTs will agree with each other in doctrine, but disagree in details of text. My position in those cases is Byzantine Priority as regards the NT text. I take this position because of how God has worked providentially.

 

[Wally]

I have seen many be born again. Haven't you ever seen the light of the Lord come upon someone who has just trusted Christ as Savior? I have. It is observable. To clarify, though, providence has a part in a person's salvation, like when Missionary D. and I met the yakuza gangster while doing dendo (evangelism) downtown. He later trusted Christ as Savior along with two of his gang of drug pushers. The original meeting was providential, but the salvation was a true miracle!

Providence, on the other hand, is a theological term describing how God orders all things for good. The clearest Bible statement of this is, of course, Rom. 8:28--"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."

It is not possible to interpret this verse as meaning there is a process to a miracle. Again, a miracle is an event, like the feeding of the 5,000. Providence is a process, like how God put me in Japan:
1. I was called to be a missionary as a college sophomore.
2. I prayed for 4 years about Hong Kong.
3. God put a missionary to Japan behind my parents at my graduation. He then asked me to pray about working with him.
4. I did pray, and God revealed His will for me in my private devotions from Rom. 10:14-15.
5. A mission board accepted me, and I did deputation, arriving in Japan by God's grace in May of 1980.

I understand…so an ‘event’ occurred. No, I cannot see the heart of a saved person and neither can you. Verbal confession is not salvation and we will only know them by their fruit (the results of the miracle). Only God can know the heart. It may be true, they may be saved, but I will not know it this side of heaven.

So there is providence that brings you to the desk (pen, paper, education and all) and an event that occurs when you translate a word from one language to another, a synapse snaps and boom, miracle. I see no appreciable difference between these processes. God can and does use all sorts of events/people, education, training, etc., etc. in both.

 

[Yeshua1]

I have examined the KJV NT in comparison to the TR, and can say that yes, sometimes they conflict. I have examined some of the KJV OT in reference to the Hebrew OT, and sometimes they differ. But the authority rests in the originals, not in any translation. This is a basic fact which any translator of any kind will tell you (except Jacques Derrida the deconstructionist). This can be proven from the Bible itself, because there are many places in the Bible where it translates itself, giving priority to the original.

The various Greek NTs will agree with each other in doctrine, but disagree in details of text. My position in those cases is Byzantine Priority as regards the NT text. I take this position because of how God has worked providentially.

Is there any Major doctrine various greek texts used to translate off from would not affirm?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Are you of the opinion that the various versions you reference (as well as others) are very close in content. That they don't conflict with one another and the same doctrine can be derived from all of them? If not, how do you decide what God's preserved Word is?

Before I answer any more of your questions, I'd like to know what you think. What is your position on these matters?

 

[Wally]

I have examined the KJV NT in comparison to the TR, and can say that yes, sometimes they conflict. I have examined some of the KJV OT in reference to the Hebrew OT, and sometimes they differ. But the authority rests in the originals, not in any translation. This is a basic fact which any translator of any kind will tell you (except Jacques Derrida the deconstructionist). This can be proven from the Bible itself, because there are many places in the Bible where it translates itself, giving priority to the original.

The various Greek NTs will agree with each other in doctrine, but disagree in details of text. My position in those cases is Byzantine Priority as regards the NT text. I take this position because of how God has worked providentially.

“the authority rests in the originals” by originals I assume you mean the Greek and Hebrew texts that were copies of copies of the originals? And by ‘authority’ I assume you mean authority to the translated text, or do you mean a Godly type of authority…like the ‘preserved’ Word? If it is simply an authority to the translations, well sure, but I assume the texts they were translated from conflict as well…otherwise it’s just a matter of an inaccurate translation on one translation’s part. Is that what you are suggesting, that one is just improperly translated, or will there be conflicts in the Greek/Hebrew texts as well. I guess either way though…if there is a conflict in the translation I have to look at the text it was translated from. So I need to learn Greek and Hebrew.

 

[Wally]

Before I answer any more of your questions, I'd like to know what you think. What is your position on these matters?

How is my position relevant? Do you plan on changing your thoughts on this matter based on my stance...or just tactics?

 

[John of Japan]

I understand…so an ‘event’ occurred. No, I cannot see the heart of a saved person and neither can you. Verbal confession is not salvation and we will only know them by their fruit (the results of the miracle). Only God can know the heart. It may be true, they may be saved, but I will not know it this side of heaven.

So there is providence that brings you to the desk (pen, paper, education and all) and an event that occurs when you translate a word from one language to another, a synapse snaps and boom, miracle. I see no appreciable difference between these processes. God can and does use all sorts of events/people, education, training, etc., etc. in both.

Wow. So you still don't see a difference between providence and a miracle.

I hope I can clarify for you, but at this stage it doesn't look like it.

I'll grant your first paragraph. Yes, salvation as an act of God wherein God regenerates the human spirit cannot be directly observed by human eyes. However it is certainly an event, and it is surely a miracle. Surely you won't argue against these statements.

As to your second paragraph, surely you do not think that every event of translating the Bible is miracle! Just because synapses fire in my brain and I translate the Word of God does not mean that a miracle has occurred, does it? Do you honestly think that thinking is a miracle equivalent to Biblical miracles such as the feeding of the 5000, the healing of blind men and lepers and others, the resurrection of Jesus Christ our Savior and Lord? If so, you cheapen the idea of a miracle from God.

I have just finished my final task in translating the Lifeline Japanese NT, which was adding the proofreading corrections of Miss N., a very smart young Japanese lady. In Matt. 28:14, she rightly corrected my を (wo), indicating a direct object, to が (ga), indicating a specified subject. Guess my synapses totally missed on that one! I made a mistake. No, miracles do not usually occur in the process of Bible translation. In 1000's of hours of doing and teaching Bible translation (even in Africa!) I have never experienced a miracle, though I have seen miracles occur in other contexts. But God's providence was all over our translation effort: leading me to be a Greek teacher at a Japanese Bible school so that I took seminary Greek on our first furlough, leading Uncle Miya to help, leading Missionary S. to help as the final editor, leading Japanese believers to be proofreaders, etc. etc.

Take a look at Waite's book, Defending the King James Bible, pp. 62-82, where he talks about the admittedly great translators of the KJV. Not a single miracle is mentioned. Do you have The Men Behind the KJV, by Gustavus Paine? Not a single miracle mentioned.

 

[Yeshua1]

“the authority rests in the originals” by originals I assume you mean the Greek and Hebrew texts that were copies of copies of the originals? And by ‘authority’ I assume you authority to the translated text, or do you mean a Godly typepert, just gewt some valid translations to use!ome greek/Hebrew ex of authority…like the ‘preserved’ Word? If it is simply an authority to the translations, well sure, but I assume the texts they were translated from conflict as well…otherwise it’s just a matter of an inaccurate translation on one translation’s part. Is that what you are suggesting, that one is just improperly translated, or will there be conflicts in the Greek/Hebrew texts as well. I guess either way though…if there is a conflict in the translation I have to look at the text it was translated from. So I need to learn Greek and Hebrew.

The Originals were the actual books written down by Paul and John and et all!
And no need to become a Greek and hebrew expert, just use legit translations!

 

[John of Japan]

“the authority rests in the originals” by originals I assume you mean the Greek and Hebrew texts that were copies of copies of the originals? And by ‘authority’ I assume you authority to the translated text, or do you mean a Godly type of authority…like the ‘preserved’ Word? If it is simply an authority to the translations, well sure, but I assume the texts they were translated from conflict as well…otherwise it’s just a matter of an inaccurate translation on one translation’s part. Is that what you are suggesting, that one is just improperly translated, or will there be conflicts in the Greek/Hebrew texts as well. I guess either way though…if there is a conflict in the translation I have to look at the text it was translated from. So I need to learn Greek and Hebrew.

Either learn it yourself, or realize that God has gifted some of us linguistically to help.

If you think final authority rests in a translation, you must never become a Bible translator. Or if you can speak a foreign language, you must never become a secular translator. You'll be fired quickly. (I knew a guy who tried to translate into Japanese from the KJV, and ended up translating "wine" into the Japanese loan word ワイン [wain], which always means alcoholic wine!)

Look at some of the times the Bible rests authority in the original:

Eli, eli, lama sabacthani.

Talitha cumi.

Immanuel.

etc., etc.

P. S. Yes, I trust copies of copies, preserved by God's providence, just like you trust copies of copies of the KJV. And I'll produce the original manuscripts of the Bible when you produce the original handwritten manuscripts of the KJV.

 

[John of Japan]

Is there any Major doctrine various greek texts used to translate off from would not affirm?

No.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

How is my position relevant?

How can I know that unless you tell me what it is?

 

[Wally]

"Wow. So you still don't see a difference between providence and a miracle. "
-No real point in being shocked…despite your apparent insatiable desire to repeat the difference between the two in nearly every one of the last 10 or so of your posts, I had a pretty reasonable grasp of the difference before I even met you (now you can be shocked…I guess). Just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I’m incapable of comprehending your points.


"I hope I can clarify for you, but at this stage it doesn't look like it."
-You are probably way too educated for this topic, but give it a try.

"I'll grant your first paragraph. Yes, salvation as an act of God wherein God regenerates the human spirit cannot be directly observed by human eyes. However it is certainly an event, and it is surely a miracle. Surely you won't argue against these statements."
-Surely I never did.

"As to your second paragraph, surely you do not think that every event of translating the Bible is miracle! Just because synapses fire in my brain and I translate the Word of God does not mean that a miracle has occurred, does it? Do you honestly think that thinking is a miracle equivalent to Biblical miracles such as the feeding of the 5000, the healing of blind men and lepers and others, the resurrection of Jesus Christ our Savior and Lord? If so, you cheapen the idea of a miracle from God."
-This particular logical fallacy is called ‘Argument from incredulity’. There is no argument here outside of your personal disdain. However, WHAT!? LOL, you’re going to pretend like something that you cannot personally comprehend as being in the least bit possible under strictly human conditions is too tiny of a miracle for God to waste His time on…? How about at least a little consistency to go with your ‘shocked off your chair’ attitude?

"I have just finished my final task in translating the Lifeline Japanese NT, which was adding the proofreading corrections of Miss N., a very smat young Japanese lady. In Matt. 28:14, she rightly corrected my を (wo), indicating a direct object, to が (ga), indicating a specified subject. Guess my synapses totally missed on that one! I made a mistake. No, miracles do not usually occur in the process of Bible translation. In 1000's of hours of doing and teaching Bible translation (even in Africa!) I have never experienced a miracle, though I have seen miracles occur in other contexts. But God's providence was all over our translation effort: leading me to be a Greek teacher at a Japanese Bible school so that I took seminary Greek on our first furlough, leading Uncle Miya to help, leading Missionary S. to help as the final editor, leading Japanese believers to be proofreaders, etc. etc."
-How dare I take away from your personal accomplishments and clear superior intellect to give the credit to a miracle from God. Sorry.

"Take a look at Waite's book, Defending the King James Bible, pp. 70-81, where he talks about the admittedly great tanslators of the KJV. Not a single miracle is mentioned. Do you have The Men Behind the KJV, by Gustavus Paine? Not a single miracle mentioned."
-There we go…’no way it could be preserved in KJV…just no way…other places…LOTs of em…just not the KJV’. Gotcha.