Really? Scripture is being translated from English to other languages?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Mexdeaf, Aug 20, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    On another now closed thread, a poster said:

    Please enlighten me. I am not aware of any groups translating from the NIV to other languages.
     
  2. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    More than one missionary has translated the KJV into another language, and, while I say such a translation is better than none, it is NOT equal to a translation from the Hebrew and Greek mss.
    I'm sure some missionary somewhere has translated the NIV into another language. The same is most likely true for every other popular English MV. And I've HEARD OF, but not confirmed, that both the Reina Valera and several modern Spanish Bibles have been translated into Portuguese and several South American Indian tongues.
     
  3. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok, I suppose there might be some "one-off" translations from one modern language version to another language.

    But I highly doubt that there are any concentrated efforts by groups such as Wycliffe to use the NIV as a basis for translations.
     
  4. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,097
    Likes Received:
    49
    Don't some of the KJVO fplks though DO see the KJV as being in the English language as perfect as the originals were in the greek/hebrew, so that the English text would be as good a basis to translate off from as greek/hebrew?

    And that they see it better to have them learn English to use the kjv any ways?
     
  5. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    Most every legitimate translation in another (non-English) language is based in the original languages and not English.

    Sure there are missionaries out there translating from English into another tongue, but those are legitimate translations to be used exhaustively in another country...one would hope.
     
  6. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    That quote was mine, and it was referring to a Chick Publications article that said the NIV was being published in other languages. Here is that link that you yourself provided;

    http://www.chick.com/ask/articles/otherlanguages.asp

    Here is what Chick (not I) said;

    It was Chick and not I that said that the NIV is being translated into foreign languages.

    And the truth is, there seems to be some truth to this, look at this information from BibleGateway;

    Source- http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Nueva-Version-Internacional-Biblia-NVI/

    This certainly suggests the NVI was at least patterned after the NIV, so the Chick article is not inaccurate.

    Now, I don't speak Spanish, but doesn't "Nueva Version Internacional" translate to New International Version in English? :laugh:
     
  7. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    What does it matter that the KJV is being used as a basis for translation or an NIV for that matter? Now, if someone suggests that only the KJV should be used then that's a problem. The same for any version. But, I have never heard anyone say that the NIV corrects the Hebrew and Greek. The same can't be said of some KJV fanatics. They actually believe the KJV trumps the original languages.
     
  8. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,643
    Likes Received:
    158
    The problem is that the KJV, the NIV are translation. Meaning is lost in any translation. To go from the original language to English and then to another language will result in a whole lot of meaning will be lost. It would be a really bad translation.
     
  9. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe scripture itself easily refutes this view. On the day of Pentacost, the Holy Spirit enabled the apostles and disciples to speak in at least 18 different languages. The scriptures are very clear on this;

    Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
    5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
    6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
    7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
    8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
    9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
    10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
    11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

    The scripture is clear, the Holy Spirit did not supernaturally give the hearers the ability to hear the gospel, but the Holy Spirit gave the apostles and disciples the ability to be scripture translators! They were able to speak in the many different languages of the Jews that were present from many different countries.

    Now, if it is IMPOSSIBLE for a translation to be correct, then the Holy Spirit would have spoken error to all of these Jews. I believe that is an absolutely ridiculous view.

    No, these men were able to accurately communicate the gospel to these Jews from many nations. The proof of this is that over 3000 persons were saved that day!

    So, this view that a translation MUST contain error is easily refuted by scripture itself.
     
    #9 Winman, Aug 21, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2013
  10. jbh28

    jbh28
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is not even close to related to the same. First, the Holy Spirit translating(like times where the NT translates the OT) is not the same as just a man translating. Now unless one believes that the Holy Spirit is keeping translators from error, then nothing here has any point.

    What was said that when doing a translation, you go back to the original language. That is correct because there can be loss of meaning by the time you get to the third language.
     
  11. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Baloney. This passage refutes that a translation MUST contain error. If so, then all of the apostles and disciples would have been teaching error at Pentacost even if they were under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

    If the Holy Spirit can find the correct words to translate the scriptures from one language to another, then Spirit filled translators can also.
     
  12. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Wycliffe translators often translate from an English version. I've heard of them using the Good News Bible since it was the first English version done with dynamic equivalence, and that is the method Wycliffe translators usually use.

    Robert D. Patton's book on translation (Issues in Missiology, Vol. III: Thoughts About Translation, 2012) is mostly a personal testimony about his own experiences translating into Sranantongo. He wrote, "Since I had no real training in Hebrew and Greek, I worked primarily from the King James Version with a variety of helps, including concordances, commentaries and lexicons" (p. 29).

    Looking for help, Patton visited Wycliffe in Suriname, and says, "They used primarily the New International Version as the base text. Most of their translators were actually working from English and not from an original Greek text, either traditional text or critical text" (p. 28).
     
  13. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    They gave the Gospel, being filled with the Holy Spirit. They were not said to have given the Gospel with perfect diction and no grammatical or linguistic errors. I've been filled with the Holy Spirit and given the Gospel in Japanese, seeing people saved while nonetheless making errors in the Japanese language. Every single missionary in Japan will tell you this, because this is an incredibly difficult language. The fullness of the Holy Spirit is about power for God's work and souls being saved, not perfection in language.
    No, this passage is not talking at all about Bible translation. There are many passages in the Bible that talk about translation and interpretation (Neh. 8:8, Dan. 5, Mark 5:41, Matt. 27:46, etc. etc.). This passage is not. Any attempt to make Acts 2 about translation is not taking the Scriptures literally, but wresting them.
    Your refutation would only be true if the Acts 2 passage was about translation, which it is not. It is about proclamation. Furthermore, it was before revelation ceased and the canon was closed. You have yet to prove your point.
     
  14. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Well, actually, the Holy Spirit gave each person present the ability to hear the Gospel in his/her own language. No one can speak 18 languages at once. Peter was speaking in his best language, whatever it was, but each person in the audience heard him as if he were speaking in the best language of each individual present. This was an entirely-different event from mens' translating God's written word into other languages.
     
  15. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    John,

    Thank you for this information- it is what I was looking for from this thread.
     
  16. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Baloney, the gift is called "tongues" not "ears". The gift of tongues is the supernatural ability to speak another language, it is not the supernatural ability to hear another language.

    And if the apostles and disciples could accurately translate the gospel into all these different languages through the Holy Spirit, surely a born again translator could accurately translate the scriptures into another language.

    I tell you what, if you do not believe you can accurately translate the scriptures into another language, then you have no business being a translator.
     
  17. jbh28

    jbh28
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Winman is correct here. They were able to speak multiple languages.
    You are missing the point, majorly. The discussion is not about accurately translating the Bible, but what is lost in meaning when you translate which can be a major problem when you get to the third language. Translating is much more complex that I think you realize. Speaking in tongues is totally irrelevant to the discussion.
     
  18. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,629
    Likes Received:
    45
    Indeed.

    The precious Geneva Bible Notes declare: "Not that they spake with one voyce, & many languages were heard, but that the Apostles spake with strange tongues, for els the miracle had rather bene in the hearers, whereas now it is in the speakers".
     
  19. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,097
    Likes Received:
    49
    many of the KJVO that post here seem to have a fundamental problem in grasping difference between translation creating a version of the bible for English use, and the inspiration granted to the Apostles to write revelation of/from god in the originals!

    the Holy Spirit ceased His action of inspiration after the Apostolic Age, as we had the canon completed , which was the full revealtion of God to us now, no more forthcoming...

    he preserved those originals for us in the original languages texts we now have, but He did NOT directly inspire and make ANY translation/version a "perfect one!"
     
  20. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, it is you that is missing the point. The point is that several folks here insist that all translations MUST contain error. If that is so, then all of the apostles and disciples speaking these tongues under the influence of the Holy Spirit would have been speaking error. That is basically accusing the Holy Spirit of error if all translations MUST contain error.

    And of course it was the speakers that were speaking tongues, they were believers, they had the indwelling Spirit. The hearers were not believers yet and did not have the indwelling Spirit, and so could not possibly have a gift of the Spirit.

    I think some folks here will go to any extreme to deny that the King James Bible could be the preserved word of God in English. Any extreme.
     
    #20 Winman, Aug 22, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 22, 2013
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...