21st Century King James Version (KJ21)

So basically, was not really done in a fashion that would produce a useful scholarly tool....

 

Think the point is that there is a wider latitude to there being more than just one valid rendering than you seem to give acceptance to being!

 

Correctamundo.

 

His story on his translation and tools highlight to us that much better to see a team do such work, normally, as there would be checks and balances to the finished result...

 

I do not advocate for less than the best translation choice. If the inspired word means children, to choose "friends" is a betrayal of truth.

 

Always happy to help.

 

This kind of thing is exactly why I get frustrated at the wannabe translators, people like Jay Green or some I could name on the BB. To accept Green's rendering we have to believe that (1) the Holy Spirit is making audible noises; (2) lost people hear those noises; (3) the Holy Spirit does physical actions such as blowing or breathing, the meanings of the Greek verb pneo.

 

There are times though when there are more than one acceptable way to translate the Greek over into English, correct? Such as if one chooses to take the idioms straight over, or try to give it an english sense!

 

Speaking of wannabe translators, I once had a call from an American businessman living in Yokosuka, Japan, offering to help with our translation.

Me: Do you know Japanese?
Him: No.
Me. Do you know Greek?
Him: No.
Me: Well, if you want to contribute financially, please send the check to my mission board.
Him: I don't believe in mission boards.

Then he was offended because we couldn't use him.

 

Why do you argue for error, mistranslation, and agenda driven eisegesis? Of course more than one English word or phrase can translate the same meaning intended by the source language word. That obviously is not the issue, it is beside the issue.

As far as idioms, where the intended meaning is not conveyed by the literal meaning of the idioms words, why not provide a literal translation and then footnote it with the idiomatic meaning or possible meanings? Rewriting the text to alter the message is not sound translation methodology.

 

Why not? Because to do so would be ridiculous.

What do you base this statement on? (Correct me if I'm wrong.) Your knowledge of Greek and/or Hebrew? You have none.Y our experience in translating? You have none. Your training in translation? You have none. Your training in any foreign language whatsoever? You have none. Am I not right?

In the light of the above, for you to make authoritative-sounding statements such as this is for you to be a pure wannabe, no more and no less.

Translating an idiom with an equivalent idiom or even with a non-idiom in such cases is sound translation methodology. Footnoting an incomprehensible foreign idiom is total confusion. And no, to translate an idiom with an equivalent idiom is to preserve the meaning, not to lose the "intended meaning."

 

JOJ, you have the unmitigated gall, the unabashed temerity to question my qualifications. You know nothing of the priesthood of believers. My view, footnote idioms, is shared by many versions that do just that, such as the NET. [personal attack removed]

I have every bit as much right to my opinions on how to best translate scripture as you do. And my views are supported by many published translators and commentators. The concept that man-made credentials allows you to to disqualify others is not biblical, it is not treating others as more important than ourselves. Jesus had no use for lip service Christians.

You post as if each and every idiom is scripture was identified and its intended meaning was known. Pure hogwash. We have various English translations translating idioms differently. You view is ridiculous, absurd and nonsensical.

Dr. Wallace agrees with me, in at least some cases!!!

 

Think that John was just stating that you do make some big time statements without having the direct qualifications to make them though!

 

The people who have training and gabe actually translated the word of God need to be seen as being more than us lay people in this area, as we cannot really argue for and against that well....