Inerrant Bible, fallible interpretation?

do you henstly expect everyone to learn greek and hebrew to read the original manuscripts?

i dont think so. God provided the way to translate his word into all tongues - so that all may have the chance to understand.

if one believes that it is a fallible translation... i fear what they may think of God himself.

 

Gekko here's the problem with translations...they are imperfect for a number of reasons. One it is man that is translating and man is fallen so anything that man does will not be 100%. There are plenty of examples of mistranslations of words.

One language does not translate 100% into the next language, and that can lead to some problems.

Bottom line is the more you can know about the original langauges the better off you will be. The deeper you want to go in God's word the more you are going to need to know the original language or at least know someone that is scholarly in the language that will help you.

 

...and the internet is loaded with all kinds of language aids. In many cases the explanation goes right along with an interlinear translation.

 

That's also why I said that more people don't preach and teach in the original languages.

Everyone can learn some, though.

But, doing so forces you to examine denominational doctrines and even doctrines within a specific church.

But, in the English translation, you are taking a word that is twice removed from the original. For example, "mansions", "shambles", "adoption", and other words such as that. With an understanding of the original underlying word, you realize that a "mansion" is not a mansion in the modern sense, a "shambles" is a meat market, "adoption" is not the placing of a child within a family...

You can understand the difference between an aorist verb and a present active participle. (Of course, with the dumbing down of our schools, most people don't understand English.)

Does everyone need to be fluent in Greek to understand it? No. But with some understanding and a preacher who knows it and teaches it, many things become clear, and such things as the Calvinism/Arminianism debate almost completely goes away.

 

"Gekko here's the problem with translations...they are imperfect for a number of reasons. One it is man that is translating and man is fallen so anything that man does will not be 100%. There are plenty of examples of mistranslations of words.

One language does not translate 100% into the next language, and that can lead to some problems.

Bottom line is the more you can know about the original langauges the better off you will be. The deeper you want to go in God's word the more you are going to need to know the original language or at least know someone that is scholarly in the language that will help you."

hmm. here's the problem i see. you people dont keep the bible in simple terms. you keep everything so complicated. the bible isn't that hard to understand. yeah its heavy at times. but its so simple - that we try to understand it by making it complicated.

man is fallen. yes. but do you not believe that God can translate through them so that all the other languages can understand His Word in a simple way?

how are we to get the word of God to those living in the middle of the amazon? teach them a bit of greek and hebrew?

 

"You can understand the difference between an aorist verb and a present active participle."

what? could you put that into clear english? make it simple. not complicated. i dont even know what those are - dont rightly care really. i read the bible - Holy Spirit helps me with the understanding of it. because its simpler then you think - in way more aspects then you think.
---

i am not going to learn greek or hebrew. i wish to learn hebrew - because its jewish - and i love israel - and pray for them.

but i dont think thats going to happen - reason being because i dont hold on to languages very well - my brain doesnt work that way. God's designed me to read english - and so i'll read english.

 

Amen, Gekko, who needs to know Greek and Hebrew when we have God's word in English?

 

exactly blammo.

i dont understand them... do they not believe God can work through them to interpret the bible the way God wants it interpreted for all the different nations around the world?

gosh.

 

You are getting into the false teaching that KJVO people get into and saying that the translators were guided so as not to make any mistakes, but that is simply not the case.

It is an imposibility to translate a text exactly accurate from Greek to English or any other language. Here's just another example.

With the word love is used in the English translation do you always understand what it means? Love can mean a variety of different things. In the Greek language they actually had three different words. One needs to know which Greek word is used to have a better understanding of what is being talked about.

Another example is everytime the phrase kingdom of heaven is used in Matthew, it should be translated the kingdom of the heavens.

There are a great many other examples.

If we want to truly understand the deep meanings of God's Scripture we are going to have to work at it. God told Adam if he was going to eat bread it was going to come from the sweat of his brow. If we want to eat the bread (the Word of God) it's going to come by the sweat of our brow.

Solomon said that wisdom is like gold and it must be mined. That means it's not simple, it must be worked for. That's why so many in Christendom get in trouble because they think it's supposed to be easy. But that is never promised.

 

If you don't believe God had a hand in the translations too then I think you would have a problem. Also, I have found that the definitions for a single word in Greek can be several different meanings which causes me to understand why some say there are mistakes either now or then.

 

But having a hand in the translations and guiding the translators as to not make an error is two different concepts. I think there were some very Godly translators, but that doesn't mean the translations are perfect.

No where is Scripture do we have a promise that God was going to guard against error in the translation of His Words.

 

No, Scripture does not discuss translation of the word but there are some things we have to believe in order to accept them. If I didn't believe God had a hand in seeing we had the written word then I would feel very sad indeed.:tear:

 

J.Jump said "You are getting into the false teaching that KJVO people get into and saying that the translators were guided so as not to make any mistakes, but that is simply not the case.

It is an imposibility to translate a text exactly accurate from Greek to English or any other language."

'so as not to make any mistakes'... eh? mistakes is not the correct word here. God does not make mistakes when translating into other languages - there are reasons unknown to us that God translated it that way.

yeah - it is impossible to exactly copy the original text. which is why there's going to be differences. thats a given. but it all says the same thing in the end - God is God - sent his Son - pure sacrifice was made to eliminate death and sin - rose from the dead to conquer death - and will be coming back.

what more do we need? we've got to keep to the simplicity of the word. why get all complicated whether its 'kingdom of heaven' or 'kingdom of heavens' ?
it could be heavenly kingdom for all i know. big deal. bubble bath of bath of bubbles? which is more accurate?

if we want to go deeper - yah - go to the original. but for those who live in Zulu... well... i dont believe they have that chance. so we give them the word of God translated into Zulu.

you want others to learn more? how about the koreans. you going to get them to learn a bit of greek and hebrew - to get back to the original? have fun! i'll just hand them the Word written in their tongue.

how about the tribes in the amazon. you going to get them to resort back to the original text because the Word of God that was translated into their tongue is incorrect in some aspects?

God gives wisdom to a fallen man. yet i pray that those who translate are embracing Christ. if not... its sad. if so - they are Spirit led. the Spirit doesn't make mistakes.

its just translated differently so that culture can understand it in their tongue.

so do you believe that Paul and Peter and all them - and all the greeks - were reading the wrong portion of the 'old testament' when the scribes translated the 'old testament' from hebrew & aramaic into greek? no. its just the word of God translated into their tongue - the Word of God is simple - Keep it simple. dont go places where the bible says nothing about. or says very vaguely about.

why make it so complicated?
yeah you may say they are mistakes - i would agree with that fact that its just translated differently to fit the various tongues of the world.

 

Funny, but different translations say different things. Which one is perfect?

When you understand the difference between aorist and a present active participle, it is not complicated at all, and it could not be more simple.

For example, is there a difference between "I went to the store yesterday" and "I am going to the store as we speak"?

 

"When you understand the difference between aorist and a present active participle, it is not complicated at all, and it could not be more simple.

For example, is there a difference between "I went to the store yesterday" and "I am going to the store as we speak"?"

yes there is. one is past tense - the other is present tense. from what i see anyways...

 

That would be true if God did the translating, but it wasn't God it was man. Please show me Scripture where God says that He will translate His Words into other languages and make them perfect.

And if so is every translation perfect or just one, becuase there are some big differences between them.

Christ said that we are to live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. Why would God waste His time giving us a bunch of books that we don't need. If all we need to know is "God is God - sent his Son - pure sacrifice was made to eliminate death and sin - rose from the dead to conquer death - and will be coming back" then that's all He would have told us. That's obviously not all we need to know.

And once they are ready to move off the milk of the Word then we move them on to the meat of the Word and then the strong meat. What does it matter that they live in Zulu. It's the same for them as it is for us.

We start with milk and then we progress on. At least that's what we should do, but you can tell my a great number of churches across the US that that's not happening

If you want to stay on the milk of the Word then that is up to you, but we are supposed to move forward and meat and strong meat will not be easy. You will have to work at it.

 

Like I said having a hand in it and making sure it is error free is two totally different things. Yes I think God had a hand in the translations, but I don't think He promised they would be perfect so therefore there is nothing for us to believe. We can only believe what He reveals to us. Everything else is speculation.

 

Well, the aorist tense is punctiliar, and is generally translated as something that is past tense. (There are exceptions, of course.)

So, in the first sentence, I "went" to the store. It was punctiliar action.

In the second sentence, however, "going" is used in the present tense, as an active verb. It is continuous action in the present.

In English, there are three tenses: Past, present, and future. In the Greek, there are six tenses: Present, imperfect, future, aorist, perfect, and pluperfect.

Well, in the Greek, there are also three voices: Active (in which the subject does the action), passive (in which the subject is acted upon), and middle (in which the subject acts with reference to himself).

Active: The priest sacrificed the bull.
Passive: The bull was sacrificed by the priest.
Middle: Jesus sacrificed himself.

There are different moods, etc., all of which make the language specific and therefore simple and straightforward.

Well, a participle is a verb that can be used as a noun, when included with the article; without the article, it's used as an adjective. The participle generally contemplates the action as real.

Running is fun. "Run" is a noun, but in this case, it's used as a noun.

In the case of "believe", it simplifies many things when you look at the grammar. For example, you believe in the aorist tense for spiritual salvation. It's an event. "Believe in the present tense" is required for obedience. When used as a present, active, participle, it's synonymous with the noun "faith". There's more, but it's supper time.

If you want more info on what a participle is, I can point you in the right direction, but this is the condensed version. They used to teach it in schools, but very few people that I find today know. (Much like the rule of casting out nines; they used to teach it in schools, but I've rarely found anyone under 40 who knows what it is.)

 

Hope of Glory:
Man took a while but you sure talked yourself out of that one. :thumbs:

 

??????????