Translating OT from Septuagint

[Conan]

Again from another place in the preface of The 1611 King James Version.

The Translators to the Reader

An Answer to the Imputations of Our Adversaries

The translation of the Seventy dissenteth from the Original in many places, neither doth it come near it, for perspicuity, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did condemn it? Condemn it? Nay, they used it, (as it is apparent, and as Saint Jerome and most learned men do confess) which they would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and commend it to the Church, if it had been unworthy the appellation and name of the word of God.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Was the Vulgate translated from the Septuagint ? Are there translations based on the Vulgate?

Jerome did not like the septuagint version and instead used the Hebrew and Greek versions of the 2nd century Jews

 

[SavedByGrace]

I did not know that God had inspired the LXX!

Most certainly not!

 

[SavedByGrace]

So you believe the world has no inspired Word of God?

No copy of the Bible or translation in any language can be Inspired by God

 

[JonC]

No copy of the Bible or translation in any language can be Inspired by God

So would you agree that we do not have the inspired, inerrant Word of God as we do not have any of the originals (OT or NT)?

 

[SavedByGrace]

So would you agree that we do not have the inspired, inerrant Word of God as we do not have any of the originals (OT or NT)?

This is very difficult issue as we don't have the originals that alone as the Inspired Word of God however this does not mean that the copies are not Inerrant to some extent

 

[JonC]

This is very difficult issue as we don't have the originals that alone as the Inspired Word of God however this does not mean that the copies are not Inerrant to some extent

I guess what I do not understand is how we can determine what is inerrant and what is not if what we have is not actually inspired by God. If the Scripture that we have is inerrant to some extent, there remains an extent to which it is not inerrant. Since the inspired Word of God did not survive time, who determines what is truth and what is error in the Scripture that we have?

 

[SavedByGrace]

I guess what I do not understand is how we can determine what is inerrant and what is not if what we have is not actually inspired by God. If the Scripture that we have is inerrant to some extent, there remains an extent to which it is not inerrant. Since the inspired Word of God did not survive time, who determines what is truth and what is error in the Scripture that we have?

Are you suggesting that the copies of the original documents are also equally Inspired as the Autographs by the writer of the Books of the Bible

 

[JonC]

I also should have offered my view (it isn't fair for me to question others who are willing to offer their position without offering mine for the same scrutiny).

I believe that we do have the inerrant, inspired, and infallible Word of God even thought we do not have the originals. I believe that when we hold a Greek text, a KJV, a NASB, etc. that we are holding the inspired Word of God.

That said, I do think that we also need to realize that what we have are translations of existing manuscripts and as such we need to study accordingly.

So I suspect the question would be how I can hold that we have the inspired Word of God in these different translations, not having the originals, when we know that translations differ and involve compromise on the part of the translators.

I believe that words should be considered as symbols that are used to convey expressions. So I believe it goes back to what is being communicated. As such I believe that divine inspiration transcends human preservation and translation. We get caught up on theologies that are often what Scripture is not communicating. We tend to ask questions to satisfy our curiosity.

This is a good discussion, BTW. I'm enjoying learning from you guys.

 

[JonC]

Are you suggesting that the copies of the original documents are also equally Inspired as the Autographs by the writer of the Books of the Bible

Yes. And I apologize for not stating my position earlier. I just did (we were typing at the same time).

 

[SavedByGrace]

Yes. And I apologize for not stating my position earlier. I just did (we were typing at the same time).

So which is it? The KJV uses a different text to the NASB for example and there are differences. Both cannot be right

 

[JonC]

So which is it? The KJV uses a different text to the NASB for example and there are differences. Both cannot be right

They are both the inspired Word of God. They are also translations.

 

[SavedByGrace]

They are both the inspired Word of God. They are also translations.

Take a couple of examples. 1 Timothy 3.16 and 1 John 5. 7. Which version is the Inspired Word of God

 

[JonC]

Ok. Let’s look at 1 Timothy 3:16 first:

NKJV: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

NASB: By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.

NIV: Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

KJV: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

GNT: καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· Ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ.


They are all inspired and communicate God’s infallible Word to us in terms of the passage.


What is being conveyed in the passage? It is a common acceptance among the audience (among “the church of the living God”) that the mystery of godliness is great: He who was revealed in the flesh (Christ) was vindicated (or justified) in the Spirit, seen by angles, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, and taken up in glory. This is the great mystery that comprises our faith.


Let’s look at 1 John 5:7

NKJV: 6 This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son.


NASB: This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for the testimony of God is this, that He has testified concerning His Son.


NIV: This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. 9 We accept man’s testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son.


KJV: Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? 6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. 9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.


GNT: 5 τίς δέ ἐστιν ὁ νικῶν τὸν κόσμον εἰ μὴ ὁ πιστεύων ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ; 6 Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐλθὼν διʼ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος, Ἰησοῦς Χριστός· οὐκ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι μόνον ἀλλʼ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι καὶ ἐν τῷ αἵματι· καὶ τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν τὸ μαρτυροῦν, ὅτι τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἡ ἀλήθεια. 7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες, 8 τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα, καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν. 9 εἰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαμβάνομεν, ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ θεοῦ μείζων ἐστίν, ὅτι αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι μεμαρτύρηκεν περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ.

Again, I have to say that they are all divinely inspired.

What issue do you have with these translations?

 

[SavedByGrace]

Ok. Let’s look at 1 Timothy 3:16 first:

NKJV: 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

NASB: By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.

NIV: Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

KJV: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

GNT: καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· Ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ.


They are all inspired and communicate God’s infallible Word to us in terms of the passage.


What is being conveyed in the passage? It is a common acceptance among the audience (among “the church of the living God”) that the mystery of godliness is great: He who was revealed in the flesh (Christ) was vindicated (or justified) in the Spirit, seen by angles, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, and taken up in glory. This is the great mystery that comprises our faith.


Let’s look at 1 John 5:7

NKJV: 6 This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son.


NASB: This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for the testimony of God is this, that He has testified concerning His Son.


NIV: This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. 9 We accept man’s testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son.


KJV: Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? 6 This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. 9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.


GNT: 5 τίς δέ ἐστιν ὁ νικῶν τὸν κόσμον εἰ μὴ ὁ πιστεύων ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ; 6 Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐλθὼν διʼ ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος, Ἰησοῦς Χριστός· οὐκ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι μόνον ἀλλʼ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι καὶ ἐν τῷ αἵματι· καὶ τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν τὸ μαρτυροῦν, ὅτι τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν ἡ ἀλήθεια. 7 ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες, 8 τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα, καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν. 9 εἰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων λαμβάνομεν, ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ θεοῦ μείζων ἐστίν, ὅτι αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ μαρτυρία τοῦ θεοῦ ὅτι μεμαρτύρηκεν περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ.

Again, I have to say that they are all divinely inspired.

What issue do you have with these translations?

In 1 Timothy 3.16 God has been removed which makes the Greek Grammar inconsistent. The same is in 1 John 5. 7 with the removal of the Testimony of the Heavenly Witnesses the Greek Grammar is wrong. Also in Acts 8.37 the testimony of the Eunuch has been removed. Again which is the Inspired Word. Your reasoning is wrong

 

[JonC]

In 1 Timothy 3.16 God has been removed which makes the Greek Grammar inconsistent. The same is in 1 John 5. 7 with the removal of the Testimony of the Heavenly Witnesses the Greek Grammar is wrong. Also in Acts 8.37 the testimony of the Eunuch has been removed. Again which is the Inspired Word. Your reasoning is wrong

I disagree. I believe that you are misunderstanding the purpose of words and what it means that Scripture is the inspired Word of God.

I believe that your reasoning is wrong. I believe this because it appears that you look to Scripture as a sort of instruction guide. What has been lost with many is that Scripture itself is narrative. It depends on context. What is correct, the Hebrew OT or the LXX? Scripture itself treats both on the same grounds. But that is because the early Church understood what you are missing.

Your understanding of "inspiration" and "God's Word" is wrong.

 

[SavedByGrace]

I disagree. I believe that you are misunderstanding the purpose of words and what it means that Scripture is the inspired Word of God.

I believe that your reasoning is wrong. I believe this because it appears that you look to Scripture as a sort of instruction guide. What has been lost with many is that Scripture itself is narrative. It depends on context. What is correct, the Hebrew OT or the LXX? Scripture itself treats both on the same grounds. But that is because the early Church understood what you are missing.

Your understanding of "inspiration" and "God's Word" is wrong.

It is clear that you don't understand textual studies. If you were right then there would not be so many Bible versions

 

[Van]

I think the LXX operates like a rosetta stone, helping scholars understand the meaning of both Hebrew and Greek words and phrases. But because the LXX is not inspired, some of the translation choices miss the mark. So it is a fallible aid.

 

[SavedByGrace]

I think the LXX operates like a rosetta stone, helping scholars understand the meaning of both Hebrew and Greek words and phrases. But because the LXX is not inspired, some of the translation choices miss the mark. So it is a fallible aid.

Indeed but there are some who cannot understand this

 

[Logos1560]

While the sixteenth verse in 2 Timothy in the KJV stated “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” it does not actually say or assert that it would be later translated by inspiration. There is no mention of the process of translating in the verse. Do some perhaps try to assume by the fallacy of begging the question that somehow the process of translating is found in this verse? Do some try to use a weak argument from silence and try to find something in the verse that is not directly stated? Quen Suan Yew wrote: “Argument from silence is very dangerous and can lead to all kinds of wrong doctrine” (Kwok, VPP, p. 53). Would the Holy Spirit of truth guide believers to advocate personal opinions based on unproven assumptions involving the use of fallacies? Would trying to suggest that 2 Timothy 3:16 teaches something it does not state be evidence of sound spiritual discernment?

According to the Scriptures themselves, it could be soundly concluded that inspiration would be a term for the way, method, means, or process by which God directly gave the Scriptures to the prophets and apostles or for the way that the words proceeded from the mouth of God to the prophets and apostles (2 Tim 3:16, 2 Pet. 1:21, Matt. 4:4, Eph. 3:5, Deut. 8:3). Jim Taylor defined the term inspiration as follows: “A process by which God breathed out his very words through holy men in order that his very words could be recorded’” (In Defense of the TR, p. 328). Jim Taylor affirmed: “As a theological definition, inspiration is a process” (p. 33). Jim Taylor asserted: “Inspiration is a process which was completed when the last New Testament writer wrote the last word” (p. 34). Tim Fellure noted: “Inspiration describes the process of employing human authors to record God’s revelation” (neither jot nor tittle, p. 19). David Cloud maintained that 2 Timothy 3:16 “describes the original process of the giving of Scripture,” and he noted that “the same process is described in 2 Peter 1:19-21” (Glorious History of the KJB, p. 213). David Cloud observed: “Inspiration does not refer to the process of transcribing or translating the Bible, but to the process of God giving the words to the men who wrote the Bible” (O Timothy, Vol. 11, Issue 11, 1994, p. 4). David Cloud noted: “The process of inspiration was something that was completed in the apostolic age” (Faith, p. 55). D. A. Waite wrote: “By the term ‘inspiration’ we must understand primarily the process by which God caused His original words to be penned down by the ‘Holy Men of God’ (2 Peter 1:20-21) whom He assigned to that task” (Dean Burgon News, June, 1980, p. 3). D. A. Waite asserted: “The process of inspiration does apply to the original manuscripts (known as the autographs). This process was never repeated” (Fundamentalist Mis-Information, p. 106). Waite wrote: “The originals were given by the process of inspiration” (p. 47). Waite noted: “It is true that the process of inspiration applies only to the autographs and resulted in inspired Words—the original Words of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek being given by God’s process of breathing out His Words” (p. 56). Steve Combs wrote: “A clear statement of the process and product of inspiration is found in Matthew 4:4” (Practical Theology, p. 34). Charles Kriessman wrote: “Inspiration is a process by which God breathed out His Words from Genesis to Revelation” (Modern Version Failures, p. 46). Dennis Kwok asserted: “The process of inspiration is a mystery of the providence of God” (VPP, p. 23). Jack McElroy wrote: “Sounds like inspiration is a method or process, doesn’t it?” (Which Bible, p. 238). Charles Kriessman quoted Thomas Strouse as stating: “Inspiration is a process whereby the Holy Spirit led the writers of Scripture to record accurately His very Words; the product of this process was the inspired originals” (p. 47). Thomas Strouse wrote: “Paul’s claim then, is that only, and all, of the autographa is inspired by God, or is God breathed. The process of inspiration extends to only the autographa, and to all of the autographa” (Lord God Hath Spoken, p. 43). Thomas Strouse noted: “The Holy Ghost came upon holy but fallible men so that they were Divinely moved (pheromenoi) in the process of inspiration to produce the product of inspiration, namely the autographa” (Brandenburg, Thou Shalt Keep, p. 240). In his note on 2 Timothy 3:16, Peter Ruckman asserted: “The process of ‘inspiration’ is the Holy Spirit breathing His words through somebody’s mouth (2 Pet. 1:21) and these words then being written down” (Ruckman Reference Bible, p. 1591). Irving Jensen noted: “We cannot explain the supernatural process of inspiration, which brought about the original writings of the Bible. Paul refers to the process as God-breathing” (Jensen’s Survey of the OT, p. 19). Gregory Tyree asserted: “This process of inspiration will never again be repeated because the canon has been closed” (Does It Really Matter, p. 32). Does 2 Timothy 3:16 state how scripture is given? Gordon Clark observed: “In ordinary language the word how always refers to a process” (Religion, Reason, p. 138). Did the process of the giving of the Scriptures by inspiration to God to the prophets and apostles end with the completion of the New Testament?

This verse in the third chapter of 2 Timothy does not actually assert nor infer that there is a giving or re-giving of the Scriptures by inspiration of God each time it was copied or each time it was translated into a different language. This verse does not assert nor teach that the process or method for the making of Bible translations is by inspiration.

It has not been soundly demonstrated from the Scriptures that inspiration would be a correct term for the way, method, or process by which the original-language Scriptures are copied or for the way or process by which they are translated into other languages including into English.