[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The way I read the text -- the emphasis is not on "repentance"
but on the fact that He did not come for the righteous among the Israel
but for the sinner. With that in mind, I believe the two text have
the same message -- with repentance being implied and the primary
message being the same.
DAVEH: OK....To me they seem vastly different, but if that's how you
perceive them....thanx for explaining it.
If one sees the primary message as that of repentance, one could
argue a difference.
DAVEH: That's how I perceive it. To me, repentance is a fundamental
element for salvation. Without repentance, one will not ultimately be
saved from the sins for which he should have repented
I am curious -- when you find scripture "incorrectly"
translated, how is that problem solved? Via textual criticism or with
an appeal to some special instructiojn or revelation of the church or
its other doucments?
DAVEH: Primarily revelation. That can be either post Biblical
revelation, or personal revelation via the Holy Ghost.
BTW Bishop, you didn't mention Mk 11:26. Do such deletions
concern you?
Here, in this Matt 9 text - "repentance" is handled
differently in the translation because of the evolving dynamic of the
accepted Greek text.....................the more recent texts omitting
the word "repentance." Again, IMO nothing in terms of message is lost
or different .. one cannot accept the call without a change of mind.
Jd
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Sent: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:19:36 -0700
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Belief
MAT 9:13
KJV: ...for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to
repentance.
NIV: ...For I have not come to call the righteous but sinners.
MAR 11:26
KJV: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in
heaven forgive your trespasses.
NIV: -----
DAVEH: Comparing these two above examples, does it seem that these
two translations convey the same message?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Dave -- what does the NIV say. Actually, I do not use the
KJV nor thge NIV at all but the NASV, the NKJV and the NLB all say the
same thing.
JD
DAVEH:
Wow....did you actually read them? To me they are certainly
contrastingly different. If they don't bother you....I am very
surprised, Lance.
Lance Muir wrote:
No Dave, I don't have a
'problem' with those passages. Every translation is an interpretation.
That'd include the KJV.
I meant for you to explain how
you adjudicate 'insofar as..".
Lance Muir wrote:
I have no serious problem
with any translation. Some on TT have a very, very serious problem with
most translations.
DAVEH: Take a look at Mt 9:13 in both the NIV and the KJV. Does it
seem to you that they are significantly different in the way they have
been translated? Or, try comparing Mk 11:26. Does something seem
peculiar about one of these translations, Lance?
However Dave, I'd still
appreciate your expanded explanation of that quotation.
DAVE: ???? You want more than I gave you, Lance? I'm not sure what
more to say. What did I fail to mention?
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
June 20, 2005 14:36
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Belief
DAVEH: Ahhhhhhh.....thanx for clearing the cobwebs, Lance!
Was there not just recently a big discussion on TT about the
accuracy of some of the Bible translations. There was a little
concern about the JW green Bible. And in previous years we've
discussed how the NIV version dropped a few passages that are found in
the KJV. Just why do we have so many versions of the Bible, if
someone didn't think there was a problem with the existing versions?
Surely they can't all be translated correctly.....do you disagree?
Furthermore, when two Christians determine doctrines differently
from the same source, does that not cause one to ponder why? Could it
be the translations are not adequately conveying what God wants
understood? I don't view that as being a weakness of God, but rather a
weakness of the translation. Is that a reasonable stance?
So Lance, I would ask you (or any TTer ) if you believe any
particular translation of the Bible is 100% accurate. If the answer is
yes, may I assume you would then also believe that the other
translations are less than 100% accurate? Now, if the answer is you
do not believe a particular translation is 100% accurate, then would
you take my position and accept the Bible to be the word of God as far
as it it translated correctly?
I would sure be interested to know if any TTers really do believe a
given translation is 100% accurate. And if you fear reprisal from
other TTers for whatever comments you might have, post it to me
off-Forum. As you know, I will not mock or denigrate your
comments....I'm sincerely interested in knowing your beliefs.
Lance Muir wrote:
Enlarge upon "as far as
it is translated correctly".
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
|