Needlessly Loose Translation Choices

More nitpicking, more effort to ridicule, but no effort to add to the discussion. I simply copied the CSB for verse three, it was not translated (or actually edited) by me. In verse three, men could be changed to people, so the nit pick is simply obfuscation. Did he say speaking in tongues was not a modern day heresy? Nope.

Salty wondered why we do not have edifying discussions. See the problem?

Too much bunker mentality?

 

More assertions of the empty sack, with no examples to demonstrate the need for loose translation. As shown before an idiom can be translated literally and footnoted with the apparent idiomatic meaning. Every word of God's word is inspired, every phrase is inspired, and to play fast and loose with God's word to twist scripture to fit man-made doctrine is indeed bad, bad, bad!

 

No, I am not a mind reader. When you translate several Greek words, with differing shades of meaning, into the same English word or phrase, you are translating loosely. Ditto for translating a word outside of its historical range of meanings, such as surprise.
The fictional claim is repeated and repeated but the claim refers to an empty sack with no examples.

 

Give me an example if you are not just repeating an assertion without a basis in reality.

 

I incorrectly thought I had copied the CSB, but now that I have looked it up in a colossal waste of time, It turns out I did not even quote the NASB accurately. But all this clamoring is simply finding fault to avoid the topic. The subject is verse 2. I provided an edit of that verse that clarifies its meaning.

I am trying to engage in discussion of an important topic, protection of the Word of God from loose, inaccurate, and ambiguous translations contained in modern translations (and in older ones as well.)

 

Funny, the NASB managed to translate it, the LEB managed to translate it, and the NKJV managed to translate it. So what exactly is "really hard" to translate?

So we have affliction in the flesh presenting an obscure meaning. So instead, the translators could insert ""difficult circumstances" and footnote the literal "affliction in the flesh" phrase. Nothing really hard about that!

 

The empty sack has been turned inside out. Modern translations contain needlessly loose translation choices. And the effort to justify the malfeasance has been exposed as an assertion without evidence.

 

One has to wonder why you thought that falsehood? Did you read it somewhere? Pick a word, any word. Let's take "perish" in John 3:13.