The Original Geek

[Deacon]

From an article in this months Christianity Today

The Bible in the Original Geek: Inside the world of the new Bible coders- and how they will change the way you think about Scripture [LINK]

"There are about 30 modern, high-quality translations of the Bible in English," Smith announces to the BibleTech group. "Can we combine these translations algorithmically into something that charts the possibility space of the original text?"
In other words, Smith is going to show the room what he calls his Franken-Bible maker. It's YouVersion, if that name actually meant what it suggests. With minimal effort—and no knowledge of Greek or Hebrew—you can create your own English Bible translation. You, dear reader, may not be interested in having your own personal translation that's different from the three on your shelf.
…Smith has already done it, or at least a rough proof-of-concept version that anyone can start using at AdaptiveBible.com

 

[Yeshua1]

From an article in this months Christianity Today

The Bible in the Original Geek: Inside the world of the new Bible coders- and how they will change the way you think about Scripture [LINK]

Dioes this mean the Catholics/SDA/Mormons/JW will all noew be able to make a version that agrees with them?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I clicked on AdaptiveBible.com and just by chance went to Galatians chapter 2. It gave me a headache. I'll stick with the good ole NASB, thank you.

 

[Van]

I tried to click on the Adaptive Bible, but according to my computer, the server could not be found. Perhaps later.

The idea seems great, at least as a bible study tool. But as observed by others, it might feed factions fed by ear ticklers.

What I do not know, and need to access the cite to find out, is how does it handle phrases for consistent translation, i.e. if you adopt one version of translation for a phrase, does the application show you all the places in scripture where the same phrase appears. Also, does it show idiomatic understandings, i.e Jerusalem means people of Israel or chosen people?

 

[Van]

Ok, I was able to access the cite (looked like a keyboard where with a single key stroke you could select book and chapter. I selected James chapter two, and looked at James 2:5.

Every possible choice for translation included "to be" which is not in the Greek but added by some but not all translators. For example the KJV does not have the insertion, and others i.e. NASB, puts the insertion in italics.

So the idea is sound, but the product needs work.

 

[Van]

A far less demanding application might be to take the NASB95 and filter it by removing all the italicized insertions, and replacing the existing text with the footnoted Literal translation. Then create a sentence flow chart using different phrases from the NET, HCSB and NKJV below the top line filtered NASB version. So simple a cave man could do it.

 

[Van]

Another shameful example of a cooked into the books sham, can be found at Revelation 13:8. Here we are given three choices, from the foundation of the world, in the foundation of the world, and before the foundation of the world. Now in the Greek, the word is "apo" which means out of, or from, or since, or after. Never in, Never before. So two of the three choices are bogus and corrupt the Greek.

 

[Van]

Lets try the simplified approach:

All who dwell - on the earth - will worship him
[All those who live]-------- [will worship the beast]


whose name - has not been written - from the foundation of the world
[everyone whose name] -------- [since the foundation of the world]


in the book of life - of the Lamb - who has been slain
--------[belonging to the Lamb]----[who has been killed]
------------------------ [who has been slaughtered]

 

[Yeshua1]

Another shameful example of a cooked into the books sham, can be found at Revelation 13:8. Here we are given three choices, from the foundation of the world, in the foundation of the world, and before the foundation of the world. Now in the Greek, the word is "apo" which means out of, or from, or since, or after. Never in, Never before. So two of the three choices are bogus and corrupt the Greek.

Still banging the ani calvinist gong, eh?

 

[Van]

Still banging the bell of truth.

Calvinism is simply mistaken doctrine, and anyone willing to view it objectively would agree.

For example, one has to forsake the NASB and go translation shopping to find translations that do not clearly refute Calvinism.

Note that if you stick with the NASB, HCSB, NET, and NKJV translations you find translations that actually present the word of God, rather than frequent Calvinist rewrites.

Lets look at a custom translation based on these choices:

All those who live on the earth will worship the beast; everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who has been killed.

 

[Yeshua1]

Still banging the bell of truth.

Calvinism is simply mistaken doctrine, and anyone willing to view it objectively would agree.

For example, one has to forsake the NASB and go translation shopping to find translations that do not clearly refute Calvinism.

Note that if you stick with the NASB, HCSB, NET, and NKJV translations you find translations that actually present the word of God, rather than frequent Calvinist rewrites.

Lets look at a custom translation based on these choices:

All those who live on the earth will worship the beast; everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who has been killed.

So there are versions that calvinists translatedto make sure theygot their pet views within the text?

So the Esv and Niv both were translated by those experts who were willing to dishonor what the bible really said, for ehat they wished it had said?

And you know that all calvinists hold to: false doctrines, or heresies then?

 

[Van]

Folks, Many times others post what they read in the minds of an opponent, demonstrating the willingness to fabricate falsehoods, but how often do they read the motivations flowing from the fruit of the Spirit.

All those who live on the earth will worship the beast; everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who has been killed.

"Apo" means out of or from or since or after, not "in" and not "before." Translations that translate "apo" as before dishonor what the Bible really says.

 

[Yeshua1]

Folks, Many times others post what they read in the minds of an opponent, demonstrating the willingness to fabricate falsehoods, but how often do they read the motivations flowing from the fruit of the Spirit.

All those who live on the earth will worship the beast; everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who has been killed.

"Apo" means out of or from or since or after, not "in" and not "before." Translations that translate "apo" as before dishonor what the Bible really says.

So you your are better qualified to translate the original Greek texts than those who did the Esv and Niv were?

 

[Van]

I do not think any qualified translator would translate "apo" as before unless motivated by a biased agenda. Notice the NIV, ESV and NLT all frequently translate "apo" as out of, of, from, etc and so they know how to translate correctly, but chose to corrupt the text.

The concept from the OP seems a sound system to enhance bible study, but the program needs to stick with phrases that actually reflect the underlying source wording.

 

[Yeshua1]

I do not think any qualified translator would translate "apo" as before unless motivated by a biased agenda. Notice the NIV, ESV and NLT all frequently translate "apo" as out of, of, from, etc and so they know how to translate correctly, but chose to corrupt the text.

The concept from the OP seems a sound system to enhance bible study, but the program needs to stick with phrases that actually reflect the underlying source wording.

again, since MANY of the same scholars were on the Niv/Nasb/Esv translation teams, did they agree to do a non cal version, Nasb, and have others be calvinist versions then?

You do realise that in certain passages/verses, that due to philosophy of the translators and honest differences in transaltion, can at times have somedifferences, as NO version other than some KJV claims infalliblty, or perfect?

 

[Van]

So you agree, any translator who translates "apo" as before is demonstrating Calvinist bias?

 

[Yeshua1]

So you agree, any translator who translates "apo" as before is demonstrating Calvinist bias?

No, rather that in their estimation, based upon greek grammar and construction, syntax, contex could be another viable option!

 

[Van]

There you have it folks, Yeshua1 thinks "apo" can be translated as "before."

 

[Yeshua1]

There you have it folks, Yeshua1 thinks "apo" can be translated as "before."

No, i am saying that IF one does do that, it would be because in their scholary opinion, based upon those factors I had listed, see it to be a viable option!

 

[Van]

That is like saying, if one says 2 + 2 = 5, it would be because in their scholarly opinion, based on factors like math and science, it is a viable option. Right, got ya.