Translating the Bible

[rbell]

Question: Why do you want to do this? What would benefit from it?
Also... is the world a better place now because of all the hundreds of translations or back then when there alot fewer? Would it not cause more confusion because there would be another translation out there? Just some questions. Please don't slam me.

I think the number of English translations of scripture has very little bearing on the condition of our world. Usually it has more to do with the number of folks reading and obeying God's Word. Fewer readers and obeyers? More problems on Earth.

 

[Clean1]

I wasn't talking about the 'study' of translations. The simple fact of have hundreds of translations causes confusion. Which one is right, wrong, biblically correct, etc. With all these translations wouldn't they be working against the Holy Spirit?
1Corinth. 14:33, "For God is not the author of confusion...". If God isn't the author of confusion then it must be Satan. Satan is using all these translations to confuse people on which to believe.

Let me rephrase my original question: Are there today, with the hundreds of tranlsations, more people coming to Christ and living Holy lives or not?
If christianity today is better, then where are the multitudes of Spergons, Moodys, Livingstons, etc.? Where are the great revivals of years gone by?

Tiny Tim,
Question: what is different between the NLT and the KJV?

 

[rbell]

If God isn't the author of confusion then it must be Satan. Satan is using all these translations to confuse people on which to believe.

Name me one major doctrine that is confused because all of these "satanic" translations.

(crickets)

 

[AntennaFarmer]

"Question: Why do you want to do this? What would benefit from it? "

From reading his original posting I think jet11 had in mind a translation primarily for his own personal study. Having made his own translation he would be able to judge between conflicting readings of existing versions.

(Jet11, please correct me if I have misunderstood.)

Of course, I am confident that he would eventually come to prefer the TR and KJV. :thumbs:

 

[Clean1]

Name me one major doctrine that is confused because all of these "satanic" translations.

(crickets)

I wasn't talking about doctrines. I was talking about knowing which translation was right or wrong.
Gotta go to school. Talk about this later

 

[Ed Edwards]

I for one, along with my wife, are glad there are other versions... and yes the world is a better place because of them. People can read them in their own language and reading level.

for example, my wife is a very bad reader... was in special ed for reading, and really has trouble. It wasn't until she picked up a NLT that she could understand the Bible.

Some have said that if a person is truly saved he or she will understand the KJV... but what about people like my wife? She is truly saved, but has reading problems... but now because of the NLT, she is growing spiritually.

That has made our world better!

Maybe there are others out there that need a new translation for this very reason.

besides a variety of translations better illuminates a passage.

Amen, Brother Tinytim -- You Glow, Bro! :1_grouphug:

 

[Ed Edwards]

double post - oops!

 

[Ed Edwards]

Clean1:

1Corinth. 14:33, "For God is not the author of confusion...". If God isn't the author of confusion then it must be Satan. Satan is using all these translations to confuse people on which to believe.

Your misunderstanding of this scripture does NOT support
your contention. So your contention fails.

'confusion' here in the KJV is the opposite of 'peace'
not the opposite of 'understanding' which your conclusion
needs. I call this error by ellipsis (...), the part of the verse
which has been omitted by the ellipsis (...)
shows clearly that 'confusion' is the opposite of 'peace'.
Use the Bible to understand the Bible!

Here is the Strong's description of the Hebrew term
translated in 1611 with the words "the author of confusion"
Note the complete absence of the modern meaning (2006) of
the word 'confusion' which is 'misunderstanding'.
Sorry, someone is trying to put new wine into old skins -
it just doesn't work

G181
ἀκαταστασία
akatastasia
ak-at-as-tah-see'-ah
From G182; instability, that is, disorder: - commotion,
confusion, tumult.

 

[John of Japan]

I for one, along with my wife, are glad there are other versions... and yes the world is a better place because of them. People can read them in their own language and reading level.

for example, my wife is a very bad reader... was in special ed for reading, and really has trouble. It wasn't until she picked up a NLT that she could understand the Bible.

Some have said that if a person is truly saved he or she will understand the KJV... but what about people like my wife? She is truly saved, but has reading problems... but now because of the NLT, she is growing spiritually.

That has made our world better!

Maybe there are others out there that need a new translation for this very reason.

besides a variety of translations better illuminates a passage.

You know, Brother Tim, this works even better if you read it in English--and then another language!! I challenge everyone on this thread to learn Japanese. . . . :tongue3: :smilewinkgrin:

Well, don't everyone volunteer at once! Oh, okay, try German then, the language closest to English. That'll work.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Clean1 //I was talking about knowing which translation was right or wrong.//

Good subject. Which of the following translations are right or wrong?

1. Ruth III:15d (KJV1611 Edition):

... and he went into the citie.

2. Ruth 3:15 (KJV1769 Edition):

... and she went into the city.

3. Ruth 3:15 (KJV1873 Edition):

... and he went into the city.

 

[jet11]

"Question: Why do you want to do this? What would benefit from it? "

From reading his original posting I think jet11 had in mind a translation primarily for his own personal study. Having made his own translation he would be able to judge between conflicting readings of existing versions.

(Jet11, please correct me if I have misunderstood.)

Of course, I am confident that he would eventually come to prefer the TR and KJV. :thumbs:

This is 100% correct, with the exception of the last part (possibly). The original post was to gather knowledge to begin my own personal translation, in order to gain a better understanding of God's Word.

Again, this will be in addition to my current Bible studies where I read passages and compare several translations.

 

[tinytim]

Tiny Tim,
Question: what is different between the NLT and the KJV?

Here is a link on the NLT. http://www.newlivingtranslation.com/

It is just one of the many I use..I usually use the e-sword program, which has many versions. And since I downloaded the Bible import tool, I now have added NIV, and NLT along with it.

If you don't have a good Bible computer program, get e-sword.
There are many good translations on there, along with good dictionaries, commentaries, and even Bibles in other languages, maybe even in Japanese..... (There JoJ, I said it!:tongue3: )

You can download it here for free. http://www.e-sword.net/http://www.e-sword.com/
Then go back to the website, and pick and choose your resources.

 

[Clean1]

Clean1 //I was talking about knowing which translation was right or wrong.//

Good subject. Which of the following translations are right or wrong?

1. Ruth III:15d (KJV1611 Edition):

... and he went into the citie.

2. Ruth 3:15 (KJV1769 Edition):

... and she went into the city.

3. Ruth 3:15 (KJV1873 Edition):

... and he went into the city.

Ed Edwards,
You are reading too much into what I am trying to say. I thought I was obvious when I said translations. By translations I mean the NIV, NASB, RSV, Gideon Bible, Living Bible, etc.
Concerning the word confusion. You are right in that it means peace. But it also means disorderly, confusing, and disruptive (according to the KJV Parallel Bible Commentary). If God is not the author of this then it is obviously Satan.

 

[Gold Dragon]

I wasn't talking about doctrines. I was talking about knowing which translation was right or wrong.

That is an easy one. The translation I've been using my whole life is right. All other translations are wrong.

I could come up with all sorts of convoluted irrational reasons as to why if you want me to. But some other folks have already done of the heavy lifting of that type of work.

 

[rbell]

Thought I'd say it again...clean1, Name me one major doctrine that is confused because all of these "satanic" translations.

(crickets)

That's what I thought.

 

[tinytim]

It is dangerous to assign things to Satan when God is behind it.

God has given us different versions to reach different people.

The mark of maturity is realizing that just because something is not done the way you grew up with doesn't mean it is wrong.

Differing versions is not confusion... but some make it confusing because of their one version only doctrine.... it is confusing.

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

Thought I'd say it again...clean1, Name me one major doctrine that is confused because all of these "satanic" translations.

(crickets)

That's what I thought

Try John 1:18 in say....the NASb.

 

[AVBunyan]

Thought I'd say it again...clean1, Name me one major doctrine that is confused because all of these "satanic" translations. (crickets)That's what I thought.

How about the NIV and most other new versions here:
Micah 5:2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

So, Jesus was from time - the King James says, "whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

Big difference between "days" and "everlasting". Origen had issues with the deity of Christ, hence the reading of the newer versions.

Or....
Dan. 3:25 He answered and said, Behold! I see four men loose, walking in the middle of the fire, and there is no harm among them. And the form of the fourth is like a son of the gods.
KJV – “the Son of God.” – clear attack upon deity of Christ here - Jesus is not a son of the gods.

Here iare just two of many links where this important issue is discussed.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/freeman-doctrines1.html
http://www.purewords.org/kjb1611/html/doctrine.htm

God bless

 

[Marcia]

How about the NIV and most other new versions here:
Micah 5:2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

So, Jesus was from time - the King James says, "whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

The reference is to the Davidic line, so the King who will come is the son of David. That is a reference to Jesus. Since other passages in the NIV and NASB make it clear that Jesus is God, this translation hardly mitigates against that.

Dan. 3:25 He answered and said, Behold! I see four men loose, walking in the middle of the fire, and there is no harm among them. And the form of the fourth is like a son of the gods.
KJV – “the Son of God.” – clear attack upon deity of Christ here - Jesus is not a son of the gods.

Are you serious? Why would the NIV and NASB attack the deity of God in this passage in Daniel where one of the pagan ministers of the king is talking and then leave Christ's deity intact all over the place elsewhere? :laugh:

This is a pagan talking! He doesn't know Christ, he just knows he sees someone who is not your standard regular human!

From the NET Bible commentary:

The phrase like that of a god is in Aramaic "like that of a son of the gods." Many patristic writers understood this phrase in a christological sense (i.e., "the Son of God"). But it should be remembered that these are words spoken by a pagan who is seeking to explain things from his own polytheistic frame of reference; the phrase "like a son of the gods" is equivalent to "like a divine being."

 

[Marcia]

By translations I mean the NIV, NASB, RSV, Gideon Bible, Living Bible, etc.
Concerning the word confusion. You are right in that it means peace. But it also means disorderly, confusing, and disruptive (according to the KJV Parallel Bible Commentary). If God is not the author of this then it is obviously Satan.

So Satan wrote translations that glorify Christ? That's a new one.

I have used and use many translations and I am not confused at all. I've used the NASB and NIV to show the deity of Christ to JW's and New Agers.

You know why I am not confused? Because I've read about and learned about the canon of scripture and translation issues and manuscripts, etc.! It is not confusing when you study the facts. :type: