Featured What are the specific biblical instructions concerning translating God’s words into other languages

Do you even know what you are asking? It seems you just want to disagree with whatever is posted. Answer your own question since you do not seem to like any that have been provided.

 

It can be a straw man diversion or attempt to dodge your own burden of proof to make a sound, scriptural case for your opinions.

Asking a question that suggests that there are too many English Bible translations does not lead to the conclusion that there should be only one English Bible translation.

Your question does nothing towards proving your opinions concerning the KJV to be true and scriptural.

Your question was answered by a question, but you ignore or avoid that sound response to it. Does a consistent, just application of your own reasoning condemn the making of the 1611 KJV when there were already several good English Bible translations available?

 

The Translators to the Reader

The Best Things Have Been Calumniated

The Highest Personages have been Calumniated

His Majesty's Constancy, Notwithstanding Calumniation, for the Survey of the English Translations

The Praise of the Holy Scriptures

Translation Necessary

The Translation of the Old Testament out of the Hebrew into Greek

Translation out of Hebrew and Greek into Latin

The Translating of the Scripture into the Vulgar Tongues

The Unwillingness of Our Chief Adversaries, that the Scriptures Should Be Divulged in the Mother Tongue, etc

The Speeches and Reasons, both of Our Brethren, and of Our Adversaries against this Work

A Satisfaction to Our Brethren

An Answer to the Imputations of Our Adversaries

The Purpose of the Translators, with their Number, Furniture, Care, etc

Reasons Moving Us To Set Diversity of Senses in the Margin, where there is Great Probability for Each

Reasons Inducing Us Not To Stand Curiously upon an Identity of Phrasing

 

This is not actually an answer to my point, which was, the Gospel is the Word of God, so therefore if we give someone the Gospel in another language, we are translating the Word of God.

Please tell me where and how I have done this, and I will apologize.

I am very passionate about Bible translation, believing it to be mandated by God. I've done it, I've taught it in the States and Africa, so anything written against it gets my dander up. I perceived your OP and your posts as being anti-missionary Bible translation. If you are not anti-Bible translation, please tell me, and I would be happy to reign in my aggressive posts. If you are anti, please say so clearly.

Good points. Except that I have reiterated that the Great Commission mandates Bible translation, a point I would like you to comment on.

Exactly. So why should not everyone in the entire world know the truths of God?

 

The Translators to the Reader
Translation Necessary
But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue? as it is written, Except I know the power of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shall be a Barbarian to me. [1 Cor 14] The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not Hebrew the ancientest, not Greek the most copious, not Latin the finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto
them. The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous; so the Roman did the Syrian, and the Jew (even S. Jerome himself calleth the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) so the Emperor of Constantinople calleth the Latin tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: so the Jews long before Christ called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better than barbarous. Therefore as one complaineth, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen 29:10]. Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which was deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, Read this, I pray thee, he was fain to make this answer, I cannot, for it is sealed. [Isa 29:11

 

According to your very own statement, you suggested and even asserted that "translating the scriptures as we have seen it in the last 150 years" is apostasy, which would assert that it is wrong or a sin. Would you not claim that teaching or supporting apostasy would be sin? Perhaps you should have considered more carefully what your statement suggested.

The translators of the NKJV were or are believers or members of the Christian faith. You have not proven them to be apostates or supporters of apostasy as your own statement would seem to imply or suggest.

 

Report me. Get me banned, then.

 

You have exalted your own non-scriptural or extra-biblical, human opinions over the word of God (Scripture) as seen in your above statements.

You do not even practice what you preach since you in effect grade, rank, esteem, and prefer the KJV over all other English Bible translations. You probably think incorrectly that you do not do that since you may deny that the other English Bible translations are the word of God translated into English. The fact remains that you are still grading and ranking the KJV and the other English Bibles when you attempt to put the KJV in a separate category by itself. You are the one attempting to treat, grade, or rank the KJV differently than other English Bible translations. God has not stated, declared, or endorsed your human opinions. The word of God had been translated into English many years before 1611.

Romans 14:5-6
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

The pre-1611 English Bibles are the word of God translated into English in the same sense (univocally) as the 1611 KJV is the word of God translated into English.

 

Jesus used Greek translations of the Hebrew Old testament, thereby giving credence to translating.

 

Seems to be the case. Can you give a case example that cannot be explained in any other way? Thanks.

 

And Aramaic

 

And or Hebrew.

 

In Mark 7:6–7, Jesus quotes the LXX of Isaiah 29:13 when he says, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’”

 

Thank you.

LXX, . . . ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσιν αὐτῶν τιμῶσίν με ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ' ἐμοῦ μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με διδάσκοντες ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων καὶ διδασκαλίας.

Mark, . . . ουτος ο λαος τοις χειλεσι με τιμα η δε καρδια αυτων πορρω απεχει απ εμου ματην δε σεβονται με διδασκοντες διδασκαλιας ενταλματα ανθρωπων.

Even in this case, if Jesus did not quote the LXX, the Holy Spirit used the same Greek words as the LXX there.

 

Well I am sure you will agree that none of the bibles that we have are the inspired scriptures or at least I would think you would agree since only the autographs were inspired. Every bible that we have is a translation. And since the KJV was done in 1611, and then redone in 1629 & 1638 & 1760 & 1769 which one do you consider to be the inspired one or do you just consider it to be a translation done by men just as all those other bibles are translations done by men.

As I said before, unless you are using a Konie Greek text for your NT then you are using a translation. So you JD have a real problem as you said you use the KJV so why are you doing that as it is not inspired so you are violating your own standard.

Mar 16:15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

Do you think Christ was saying that we have to teach everyone English before we can preach the gospel to them or perhaps French or German and why not Greek but then it would have to be Konie Greek as that is what they spoke back then. And what language do you think the autographs were written in JD? As I said before, you do not even know what you are asking.