Do you want me to accept the NWT?I did listen about the bible you said "I'm not going to insult it by accepting crap translations or pretending even the best translators are perfect." and then refuse to give any supporting evidence to back up your claim.
Again the NWT was produced in the 1960s Jospeh Smith warned about the bible in the 1800s so ummm, that still doesn't make any senseDo you want me to accept the NWT?
Do you want me to pretend that translation isn't a complex imperfect art?
Answer the question:Again the NWT was produced in the 1960s Jospeh Smith warned about the bible in the 1800s so ummm, that still doesn't make any sense
Answer the question:
Do you want me to accept the NWT?
Do you want me to pretend that translation isn't a complex imperfect art?
Until you say "yes" to either of these questions, you really have nothing to argue here.
Unless you want to claim that Jospeh Smith was specifically talking about the NWT that wasn't written for another 120 years???
Because I'm talking about acknowledging the importance (and difficulty) of having good translation. This isn't specifically about NWT at all, it's just an example of an obvious neglect of that.Seriously I already said that the NWT hardly counts as a bible translation, it was written by non christians in 1961, Joseph Smiths warnings about the bible came in 1842 - how do think the two are related at all?? Unless you want to claim that Jospeh Smith was specifically talking about the NWT that wasn't written for another 120 years???
This is ridiculous, I honestly can't believe this is your angle
You need a credible example that speaks to the relevance of what Jospeh Smith said in 1842!Because I'm talking about acknowledging the importance (and difficulty) of having good translation. This isn't specifically about NWT at all, it's just an example of an obvious neglect of that.
Do you think having a high quality translation wasn't important in 1842?You need a credible example that speaks to the relevance of what Jospeh Smith said in 1842!
Thank you, I really needed a laugh!Maybe he was a prophet after all!A prophet of 'crap' Bible translations.
I think once again you are avoiding the questions askedDo you think having a high quality translation wasn't important in 1842?
Translation was important in 1842 (and 1642, 1942, etc). Hence LDS stressing of this.I think once again you are avoiding the questions asked
Talking in circles doesn't answer anything.Translation was important in 1842 (and 1642, 1942, etc). Hence LDS stressing of this.
Unless you want to say "translation wasn't important important in 1842" your argument doesn't really have a point.
I. Do. Believe. The. Bible. Every. Word.
I've said this a million times now.
Answer the question:
Do you want me to accept the NWT?
Do you want me to pretend that translation isn't a complex imperfect art?
Until you say "yes" to either of these questions, you really have nothing to argue here.
Because I'm talking about acknowledging the importance (and difficulty) of having good translation. This isn't specifically about NWT at all, it's just an example of an obvious neglect of that.
Here is some evidence of bad translation of the Bible:I did listen about the bible you said "I'm not going to insult it by accepting crap translations or pretending even the best translators are perfect." and then refuse to give any supporting evidence to back up your claim.
What is wrong with the JST?Kind of like the so-called JST.
Did Joseph Smith know Greek? Otherwise it is not a translation. Romans 8:29-30 demonstrates Smith's bending text to suit his preconceptions.What is wrong with the JST?
It was given to Joseph Smith by revelation through the Holy Ghost.Did Joseph Smith know Greek? Otherwise it is not a translation. Romans 8:29-30 demonstrates Smith's bending text to suit his preconceptions.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?