Evil men, seducers, and Bible translation work

[Mexdeaf]

I do not believe it includes Christian Bible translators who are trying to honestly translate the Bible into another language (English or any other language) to the best of their ability. However, I believe it includes the translators of the JW's NWT because its sole purpose is to shore up errant JW doctrine.

The translators of the SDA "Clear Word Bible" might be another group that qualifies for the "evil men and seducers" title.

 

[SolaSaint]

There is absolutely no way to PROVE those statements, so how can you make them?

True, there is no way to prove there are better manuscripts, but many many scholars believe that these newer translations that used a critical textual comparison of the many Greek manuscripts available is a better way to get us back to the original autographs. I know some don't agree and the Byzantine text that was used for the KJV is very reliable, but did you know it isn't the oldest and wasn't written until the 4th century? So in my opinion, using many reliable older texts is better.

As many have already said in here, the translations most of us use are all doctrinally sound and it's only when someone purposely perverts the text that we should shout HERESY! This would be like the JW bible (New World Translation).

 

[John of Japan]

So someone *wonder who that is* is suggesting that Ephesians 3:13 is speaking of modern translators?

Then they just accused John of Japan of being evil. Wow

Anyone who would accuse any of the modern people who have worked diligently on faithful translations of God's Word into modern language, knowing full well that they were working on the very Word of God and took that job with all seriousness - has a screw loose.

Hmm. No wonder my ears were ringing when I saw this thread. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[annsni]

Hmm. No wonder my ears were ringing when I saw this thread. :smilewinkgrin:

I see people who are serious men and women of God like yourself, John, who take this job of translation with utmost seriousness and faithfulness and then you get these other people who are all about "evil men and seducers" saying that you all have an agenda to twist the Word of God. It just sickens me.

 

[stilllearning]

Hello annsni

From you post(# 3), I can only assume that I am the one that “sicken’s” you;
(But if you care to look over my responses, you will see, that I NEVER said anything about “all” of any group of people being wrong.)

I try to stay away from words like “all” and “every”, when talking about people:
I think all of us should.
--------------------------------------------------
I was torn between the 1st and 2nd choices, in this poll:
The first, talking about today’s Bible translators, an the second talking about the unsaved.

As if to say, that it is impossible for a Bible translator to be unsaved!

One could say, “certainly no preacher or evangelist or Bible translator, could ever be unsaved, and actually be doing Satan’s work”.........

Matthew 7:21-23
V.21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
V.22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
V.23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

and

2 Corinthians 11:13-15
V.13 For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
V.14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
V.15 Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.



Satan hasn’t given up.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Do we know for sure that the translators of the KJV were all saved?

 

[John of Japan]

Hello annsni

From you post(# 3), I can only assume that I am the one that “sicken’s” you;
(But if you care to look over my responses, you will see, that I NEVER said anything about “all” of any group of people being wrong.)

I try to stay away from words like “all” and “every”, when talking about people:
I think all of us should.
--------------------------------------------------
I was torn between the 1st and 2nd choices, in this poll:
The first, talking about today’s Bible translators, an the second talking about the unsaved.

As if to say, that it is impossible for a Bible translator to be unsaved!

One could say, “certainly no preacher or evangelist or Bible translator, could ever be unsaved, and actually be doing Satan’s work”.........

Matthew 7:21-23
V.21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
V.22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
V.23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

and

2 Corinthians 11:13-15
V.13 For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
V.14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
V.15 Therefore [it is] no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.



Satan hasn’t given up.

I'm working on a modern language Japanese NT translation from the TR. According to your view as expressed on the poll, then, am I not evil?

The problem with many of your view is that you never think about reaching the world for Christ with new Bibles, even though over 3000 languages have no portion of the Scripture. There are millions of people around the world with NO BIBLE whatsoever, yet many independent Baptists in the homeland (I'm IFB, too) spend so much time fighting for the KJV (I use it too) that they fail to heed Christ's command: "Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest."

I do thank God, though, for independent Baptists in the homeland (and folk here on the BB) who are waking up to the need, including my backers.

 

[John of Japan]

I see people who are serious men and women of God like yourself, John, who take this job of translation with utmost seriousness and faithfulness and then you get these other people who are all about "evil men and seducers" saying that you all have an agenda to twist the Word of God. It just sickens me.

Some critics I just laugh at (seriously!), and others I just ignore. Occasionally I try to correct one, but it may or may not work. :saint:

 

[stilllearning]

Hello John of Japan

Praise the Lord for your work;
And regardless of what others have said, I am not a critic of your work.

Living in Japan as you do, you may not be aware of the credulousness of many here in the USA.
------------------------
Many Christians seem to have the idea, that “everything” that calls itself Christian, is trustworthy.

When in fact, we need to be careful.

 

[John of Japan]

Hello John of Japan

Praise the Lord for your work;
And regardless of what others have said, I am not a critic of your work.

Living in Japan as you do, you may not be aware of the credulousness of many here in the USA.
------------------------
Many Christians seem to have the idea, that “everything” that calls itself Christian, is trustworthy.

When in fact, we need to be careful.

Okay, thanks for the good word.

Maybe to avoid misunderstanding you could have gone with the "other" option on the poll.

 

[jonathan.borland]

but did you know it isn't the oldest and wasn't written until the 4th century?

But did you know that the second century fathers used a text that differs in many respects from the later Alexandrian text? In many areas the text of the second century fathers is much closer to the earlier Byzantine text than the later Alexandrian. Take Luke 22:43-44 to start out with!

 

[Mexdeaf]

Do we know for sure that the translators of the KJV were all saved?

Bumped for an answer from stilllearning. Honest questions deserve honest answers.

 

[stilllearning]

Hi Mexdeaf

I didn’t answer, because I didn’t think you were serious.

Your question........

“Do we know for sure that the translators of the KJV were all saved?”

The reason I didn’t take it seriously, is because of the only meaningful way we have, of determining if someone is saved.

The Bible makes it clear, that simply saying your saved, isn’t enough, so how is this proven......
--------------------------------------------------
I have been saying for years, that it is possible to be able to factually state, if someone is unsaved: (If they preach a different Gospel.)
E.G. By this we know for sure that every Pop, is lost.

But, it is not that clear cut, to determine if a professing Christian is truly saved.
--------------------------------------------------
With all that said, from what I have read about those used to translate the KJV, I would say that they were saved.
(Because of there Biblical devotion to our Heavenly Father.)

 

[Trotter]

Because of there Biblical devotion to our Heavenly Father

I hate to inform you, but biblical devotion does not save anyone, nor can it be a litmus test for salvation. I know a couple of people personally who are extremely learned biblical scholars... and both readily admit that they are not Christians. One is an outspoken atheist while the other is agnostic. Both know the bible and can recite chapters from memory, as well as expound upon doctrine and the underlying texts.

 

[AntennaFarmer]

Trotter: I believe 'learning intended to say something like: "I think that they (the KJV Translators) were saved because of their Biblical devotion to our Heavenly Father." That is to say that their devotion to God is characterized as Biblical (according to the Bible). That is distinct from saying that they were devoted to the Bible (though that was likely true as well).

Wouldn't it be good to show that Bishop Wescott et al were great men of God also?

It seems clear to me that poll choice #1 was intended to be extreme and overstated. Perhaps some would have preferred: "Yes, evil men and seducers include some 21st century Bible translators." I seriously doubt that anyone here thinks all Bible translation work should be stopped.

A.F.

 

[stilllearning]

Hello Trotter

I can believe your response.

When I said........“Biblical devotion to our Heavenly Father”, I meant that their devotion was “Biblical”(worshiping the way those in the Bible had worshiped), and they were worshiping the one true living God.

This is in comparison, to those who clame to be saved, yet practice a faith that is extra-biblical.

 

[SolaSaint]

But did you know that the second century fathers used a text that differs in many respects from the later Alexandrian text? In many areas the text of the second century fathers is much closer to the earlier Byzantine text than the later Alexandrian. Take Luke 22:43-44 to start out with!

Jonathan, what text are you referring to?

 

[jonathan.borland]

Jonathan, what text are you referring to?

We don't have much representation among the second century fathers, but what we do have seems to support the notion that they had more of a Western-type of text than an Alexandrian-type of text. The Western-type of text is often considered to be closer to the so-called Byzantine-type of text due to its lengthier text (compared to the generally shorter Alexandrian text).

I brought up Luke 22:43-44 as an example of the phenomenon: "Then an angel appeared to him to strengthen him. And as he was in agony he began to pray more earnestly: then his sweat became like drops of blood falling down upon the ground."

One will notice that Justin and Irenaeus (and Tatian via the Diatessaron) support the presence of these verses in the second century. On the other hand, the earliest Greek manuscript (p75) omits the verses. But indeed the earliest attainable text, based on the earliest of the early fathers, is precisely the consensus text that has been preserved, in part, by the majority of all Greek manuscripts. Thus from this example alone it is clear that the assumption that the earliest Greek manuscript evidence is closest in time or in precision to the earliest received tradition is highly defective.

Jonathan C. Borland