Bible Translation

[ohgin]

I know that this topic may not be very popular and that I may be a little hypocritical because by the way the bible translation that I am currently reading at the moment is New Living Translation but from this website I really found that there modern translation seemed to deviate a little from the King James .
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/free_ebook.htm
Download the book called antichrist conspiracy. Frankly speaking in the past I really think that most translation are ok and that as long as I am able to get the central message then it should be ok but after reading this book I am thinking of getting a KJV even though it is not really easy to understand because it seems that there are verses in the modern translations that seems to deviate from the KJV and it would be impossible for a person reading those modern translation to actually interpret the same verses to have the same meaning as the KJV.

 

[Beoga]

http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/free_ebook.htm
Download the book called antichrist conspiracy. Frankly speaking in the past I really think that most translation are ok and that as long as I am able to get the central message then it should be ok but after reading this book I am thinking of getting a KJV even though it is not really easy to understand because it seems that there are verses in the modern translations that seems to deviate from the KJV and it would be impossible for a person reading those modern translation to actually interpret the same verses to have the same meaning as the KJV.

The KJV is not the "standard" to judge all other versions. Like all other versions, it is also a translation (to be sure it is a good translation). However, the standard to see if versions deviate is not the KJV but the Greek and Hebrew Texts.

 

[edie19]

The KJV is not the "standard" to judge all other versions. Like all other versions, it is also a translation (to be sure it is a good translation). However, the standard to see if versions deviate is not the KJV but the Greek and Hebrew Texts.

I agree - both ESV and NASB are very accurate to the original texts - ESV is particularly readable. While I've not read this translation, Holy Bible: From the Ancient Eastern Text (G. Lamsa translator) has been highly recommended to me.

If someone really likes the King James, then I suggest the NKJV - again, more readable than the old English of the original King James.

No matter what though - how it compares to the original texts should be the priority in choosing a translation.

 

[JM]

I agree - both ESV and NASB are very accurate to the original texts - ESV is particularly readable.

Just wondering which text? I thought they used the ecclectic text method where the translator make the choice on what mss to use and when.

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

I know that this topic may not be very popular and that I may be a little hypocritical because by the way the bible translation that I am currently reading at the moment is New Living Translation but from this website I really found that there modern translation seemed to deviate a little from the King James .
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/free_ebook.htm
Download the book called antichrist conspiracy. Frankly speaking in the past I really think that most translation are ok and that as long as I am able to get the central message then it should be ok but after reading this book I am thinking of getting a KJV even though it is not really easy to understand because it seems that there are verses in the modern translations that seems to deviate from the KJV and it would be impossible for a person reading those modern translation to actually interpret the same verses to have the same meaning as the KJV.

There are some very good translations out there and there are some very bad ones as well. THere are also some very real issues "text issues" that conservative scholars are wrestling with.

The overwhelming majority of what we read in the Bibles day is very accurate, but there are some very real questions about certain verses that we should not ignore or pretend that they don't exist.

No translation is without error. We believe that the Scriptures are infallible in the original autographa. We don't have the originals, but we do know that what we have is accurate.

Greg Bahnsen wrote and article on this issue that I think is very important It is The Inerrancy of the Autographa . It is a must read when discussing this issue.

Coram Deo,
Kenith

 

[JM]

Just wondering how the confessions of faith fit into our understanding of the mss?

WCF and LBCF
Chapter I, 8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.

Is the modern view in line with the Reformed confessional view?

 

[mlqurgw]

I know that this topic may not be very popular and that I may be a little hypocritical because by the way the bible translation that I am currently reading at the moment is New Living Translation but from this website I really found that there modern translation seemed to deviate a little from the King James .
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/free_ebook.htm
Download the book called antichrist conspiracy. Frankly speaking in the past I really think that most translation are ok and that as long as I am able to get the central message then it should be ok but after reading this book I am thinking of getting a KJV even though it is not really easy to understand because it seems that there are verses in the modern translations that seems to deviate from the KJV and it would be impossible for a person reading those modern translation to actually interpret the same verses to have the same meaning as the KJV.

There is a difference in a translationof the Bible and a paraphrase. I use the KJV mostly because I believe that it is as good as any other for the most part and I am used to it. I love its language and it is evident that it has been used of God and preserved by God as a major translation. Of course I use others as well in my study.

It ought to be remembered that it is only an English translation. The Bible has been translated into many different languages and they are as good as the English.

A paraphrase is altogether different though. It is an interpretation of the Bible and is full the views of the writer. That would account for the discrepancies you mention. I believe the Living Bible and the New Living Bible are paraphrases and one should never use them to build doctrine. I view them like commentaries. They are useful to get a sometimes different point of view but are not in any sense to be relied upon as inspired.

 

[Cajun Huguenot]

Just wondering how the confessions of faith fit into our understanding of the mss?

WCF and LBCF
Chapter I, 8. The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God, who have a right unto, and interest in the Scriptures, and are commanded in the fear of God to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the vulgar language of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and through patience and comfort of the Scriptures may have hope.

Is the modern view in line with the Reformed confessional view?

Hey JM,

It depends on which modern view you are talking about. The liberal view is not in line with the confession, but Conservative views are.

We know that the Scriptures are God breathed. We also know that what we have is very accurate. This does not mean that there are no questions or no problems about what we have. We have both questions and problems about the texts we have, but over all they are minor.

God has done His work and we still have His written Word, but that does not mean that we have perfect translations or perfect understanding of some of the manuscript problems.

Does this mean that the Confession is wrong about this? NO.

For example, the Western Bible during the Middle Ages was the Vulgate, Jerome's Latin translation. It was THE Western Bible for 1,000 years and today we know that Jerome made a few errors. Before Jerome's translation the Western Bible (O.T.) was a Latin translation of the LXX, which is different from the Hebrew O.T. at a number of points. Jerome went back to the Hebrew for his translation.

Which was right, Jerome's or the Old Latin taken from the LXX? I think Jerome did us a great service by going back to to original language so that we did not have a O.T. that was a Latin translation of a Greek translation of the original Hebrew and Aramaic.

We too often want little simple bumper stickers answers for problems, but God has not seen fit to give us such answers in many areas of study. Some things are complicated, but that does not mean that what we have is not accurate, because it is. The fact that what we have is accurate, does not mean that there are no questions remaining about certain texts or that the answers or simple.

God wants some of His people struggling with these things, and it is good that we do so.

In Christ,
Kenith