-
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!
The major problem with modern English translations.
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
Hazelelponi
New Member
Propagandists? Are you talking about me?
This is my faith, I'm not a "propagandist", I think it's worth a lot. If I didn't I wouldn't be here.
I don't know what kind of people you know, but maybe you need to know more believers.
Neither I, nor ANY English speaking person can understand word salads. I just decided it wasn't worth trying to figure out, and was polite about an exit.
My "stupidity" allowed you to save face since you have a lack of communication skills.
I was just being nice. Other than that, I'm the former Muslim, now saved Christian. Nice to meet you too. And no worries, pretty much everyone hates me now, you're certainly not alone. The only people who love me are the family God gave me.
Last edited:
37818
Well-Known Member
Not the point. It matters whether an individual or group is being addressed or included.
Good Grief, how could I be talking about you, I am not a mind reader. Me thinks thou protest too much.
Here is what I said, which was not addressed to anyone in particular:
There are major problems that still exist in our English translations, even the best modern ones, such as the NASB. The claim that using "you" to indicate either an individual or a group is much ado about nothing. What are the actual major problems?
Here are a few, in no particular order:
1. Needless ambiguity, such as translating "Kosmos" as "world" when "humanity" is the actual meaning.
2. Translating "pas" (all) as "all things" when only the things in contextual view are meant.
3. Translating faith in Christ and placement into Christ using the same phrase.
4. Adding words (with or without italics) that change the meaning of the verse such as "to be" at James 2:5
5. Changing the grammatical form of a word to alter the message to conform to man-made doctrine, such as "to be saved" rather than "for salvation" at 2 Thessalonians 2:13.
6. Translating faith in Christ and Christ's faithfulness with the same phrase.
Here are a few, in no particular order:
1. Needless ambiguity, such as translating "Kosmos" as "world" when "humanity" is the actual meaning.
2. Translating "pas" (all) as "all things" when only the things in contextual view are meant.
3. Translating faith in Christ and placement into Christ using the same phrase.
4. Adding words (with or without italics) that change the meaning of the verse such as "to be" at James 2:5
5. Changing the grammatical form of a word to alter the message to conform to man-made doctrine, such as "to be saved" rather than "for salvation" at 2 Thessalonians 2:13.
6. Translating faith in Christ and Christ's faithfulness with the same phrase.
Well, as a moderator, I was 110% convinced that you were talking about him.
He said he didn't understand what you were saying. Then you said to the "folks" in general that "propagandists" use "personal incredulity" to dismiss an argument.
Now you have DEFINED personal incredulity. Why did you do that? The very definition is what you claim SOMEONE was doing!
Who were you talking about if not the person you were conversing with?
I was talking about anyone who says they do not understand when they do, in order to deflect. Just because you believe you know what was in my mind, doesn't mean I operate at that same level. I defined Personal Incredulity because I did not know, again being no mind reader, whether the audience understood the term.
So what? It is not necessary or required in present standard English. It does not make the English Bible translation wrong.
Alan Macgregor asserted: “Hebrew makes a gender distinction for second and third person pronouns (singular and plural) as it does also with singular demonstrative pronouns. The Greek has feminine third person plural pronouns, and feminine reflexive and reciprocal pronouns. However, the English language is incapable of effectively translating these” (400 Years On, p. 254). William Mounce noted: “In English all imperatives are second person; in Greek there are second and third person imperatives” (Greek for the Rest of Us, p. 194).
Every characteristic or aspect of the original-language texts of Scripture are not translated into English, but that does not diminish the proper secondary authority of the Bible translation.
E. W. Bullinger observed: “There are figures used in the English language, which have nothing that answers to them in Hebrew or Greek; and there are Oriental figures which have no counterpart in English” (Figures of Speech, p. xv). Concerning one figure, Bullinger noted: “This figure is common to all languages, but the instances cannot readily be translated from one language into another” (p. 307). In one example of such figures, E. W. Bullinger asserted: “Acrostics, like many other figures, occur only in the Originals, and cannot be reproduced in a translation” (p. 188).
Concerning another difference, TR-defender Steve Combs acknowledged that “languages differ in their use of articles and conjunctions” (Practical Theology, p. 103). William Mounce noted: “Greek can use conjunctions differently than we do in English” (Greek for the Rest of Us, p. 82). William Mounce added: “Almost every sentence in Greek narrative begins with a conjunction” (Ibid.). KJV-only author Kirk DiVietro claimed: “The conjunction does not always need to be translated into English. This is a matter of translator’s discretion and not textual reading” (Where the KJB Leaves the Greek Text, pp. 8, 10, 13). William Barrick wrote: “Sometimes the conjunction serves no translatable purpose and the context allows for its omission in translation—especially when the receiving language prefers not to use one due to unnecessary repetition” (Understanding Bible Translation, p. 86).
37818
Well-Known Member
A singular pronoun in God's word is not plural.
In present standard English, the pronoun you is the singular 2nd person pronoun as well as being the plural 2nd person pronoun.
A Bible translation that uses "you" instead of an archaic "thou" is still God's word translated into English.
37818
Well-Known Member
And does not identify when God's word is to the second person singular.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Contemporary English does not identify second person singular pronouns as such, either, and I am sure there are other languages which are similar. Then there are languages like French, where "tu" is singular, "vous" is plural, but "vous" is also used for singular in formal settings.
These are pretty much all you need in this life. I hope God uses you to show other Muslims the REAL God and His Son Jesus as your only Savior. The KJVO myth is a false doctrine of Satan's, which he uses to create strife and division among Christians. Just remember that the KJVO myth is NOT found nor promoted in ANY valid Bible version. Just use the version(s) God has led you to use, and keep your focus on the Author of the word!
Thank God you re the ex Muslim, who came out from that pagan religion, of the false god and false prophet to now come to the risen Savior and Lord Jesus
The truth is that if you had someone from the 1611 translator team open up a modern version today such as Nas/esv/Nkjv etc, they would be totally confused, as their understanding of English grammar vocabulary meanings from their time would indeed cause them to really misunderstand much of what the MV was conveying to them in modern English, so would they not require to have a bible translation that conforms to their English of 1611, same way today readers should need a modern English translation
37818
Well-Known Member
This is at issue.
Brother, why it this an issue?