1. 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!

Featured Does Dynamic Equivalency cause.....

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by McCree79, Sep 30, 2015.

  1. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    OK, I accept your judgment. The easter-passover thing was also part of his "advanced revelation" theory as well as "double inspiration". I figured he invented the theory of advanced revelation to give scripture the meaning he wanted.

    Just out of curiosity (I realize this is a bit off topic) what do you think? Does "easter" of Acts 12:4 have any credibility at all (personally, I don't think so). What I have wondered is - why. Why did the AV translators use "easter" rather than "passover" making the same error as Ruckman?

    BTW, I am no Ruckman fan by any means.

    Thanks again

    HankD
     
  2. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm actually researching this right now to make sure the footnote I put in our rendering (as "Passover") is correct. It would be worth a thread here sometime.

    I was already pretty sure of your opinion of old Peter R. :D
     
  3. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    OK, thanks John.

    Yes I think it's been years since we had that heated "Passover" debate here at the BB.
    I believe the KJVO fervor has died considerably by now.


    HankD
     
  4. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Since God gave to us each and every word as being inspired and important, would not the philosophy of doing a word for word as much as possible be better to the intended meaning than doing it thought by thought?
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You simply do not pay attention. Look at posts 26,34 and 35. Respond to them.
     
  6. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    So then you would not be concerned with just what terms and words were chosen by the Holy Spirit to be recorded down for us then?

    In the end, isn't it always the best to adopt the theory of striving to get a literal translation of what God actually said to us, and then move away from that only when it is required?

    that more formal versions such as nasb/Njkv/Web do manage to get across more of the original intended meaning to us?
     
  7. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    For the hard of hearing and slow to understand -read the above carefully.
     
  8. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, It's been several years and we were both present for the debate.

    Research: Why was "Easter" chosen by the AV translators for "pascha" in Acts 12:4.

    My own research from the past only came up with one credible answer and that was it was an "ecclesiastic" choice that satisfied both royalty and church authority. Don't have a reference and yes it would take another thread and perhaps not worth the fallout and/or if there would be any interest in the first place for further research .

    HankD
     
  9. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Or they might have just been following Tyndale, who had "ester."
     
  10. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    OK, but still begs the question of why it was used by Tyndale.
    I'm satisfied with either reason.

    Thanks John
    HankD
     
  11. Logos1560

    Logos1560 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,204
    Likes Received:
    405
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Perhaps they didn't. There is some historical evidence from the 1600's that suggests that the KJV translators had used "the Passover" at Acts 12:4 as in the 1560 Geneva Bible. Two sources from the 1600's suggests that it was prelates that changed the rendering choice of the KJV translators back to Easter.
     
  12. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thanks Logos, I had heard that last sentence somewhere as well.

    HankD
     
  13. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I suspect Richard Bancroft was the culprit.
     
  14. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The problem with this sort of nonsense is a sort of Quis custodiet situation. What Fee and Strauss are saying is "Trust us, we're the experts!" But why would I trust Gordon Fee with a translation or with textual criticism when I certainly don't trust his theology? When these people put words in their translations that aren't there in the original language and say, "Oh well, we're translating the meaning not the words," the average Bible reader without knowledge of the original languages has no means of knowing whether it's right or wrong.

    My strong advice to all readers is pick a translation that is as literal as possible (NKJV or NASB).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Translators are usually a team effort. There are checks and balances.It is certainly not nonsense to communicate the meaning of the original as accurately as possible.
    Gordon Fee had nothing to do with the paper by Mark Strauss.
    Every Bible version not in the original languages is putting words in translations that were not there in the originals.

    If you think you have a translation that has exact equivalents --you are deceived.
    The average Bible reader is not as unaware as you seem to think. Readers of translations usually compare various versions --not one alone. They usually take note of Bible study helps such as commentaries; at the least.
    Your "strong advice" should have been tempered with an encouragement to compare various versions --not only the so-called literal ones. The more formal ones tend to distort the message at times and lead to ambiquity.
     
  16. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    From D.A. Carson's The King James Version Debate
    But why a literal translation is necessarily more in keeping with the doctrine of verbal inspiration, I am quite at a loss to know...The Holy Spirit who inspired the words of Scripture equally inspired the syntax and idioms. Ultimately what we want is a translation that means what the original means, both in denotation and connotation...it ought to be obvious that to some extent every translation from anywhere on the spectrum, is necessarily involved again and again with finding the 'dynamic equivalent.'
     
Loading...