“You should never attack a view until you can defend it.” Mic drop

Grateful for Dr. Strauss. Studied under him in San Diego. Great teacher.

Listening to members of the CBT outside of the context of the NIV totally restored my faith in that translation when, as a young teen, the 2011 revision initially made me question it. The theological strength of, for example, Dr. Strauss's *Four Portraits, One Jesus* or Dr. Moo's NICNT volume on Romans gave real comfort to me as a believer and real confidence in the NIV again as a translation (even though there are still places where I think they made the wrong decision!)

Thank you, Gentlemen 🌹⭐🌹⭐

That was a great interview! I have recently added the NASB 2020 to my list of bibles that I read on the daily , and have found it to be more helpful . Although I do not now have a favorite Bible translation ( thanks to Brother Mark ) I find myself gravitating to this NASB 2020 . Id like to know your thoughts on its translation at some point , if you were to get the time for I can’t find a more recent review of it to determine its overall competitiveness.

Question 42: when is a Catholic edition of the NIV going to be released? 😊

I fully appreciate that Mark has fondness for the Seiko that the Lord hath made.

@rayhchc6451

7 ай бұрын

Mark is fond of anything that blends, confuses or compromises 😇😇😇

@justinj_00

7 ай бұрын

​@@rayhchc6451your camp are the ones sowing dissentions and confusion, not Mark

@rayhchc6451

7 ай бұрын

🗨 Justin 🗨 How is it not a good thing for sheep to separate themselves from the goats? 😇

@justinj_00

7 ай бұрын

@@rayhchc6451 that is blatantly, clearly, undeniably the Son of Man's job, not yours. Go read Matthew 25 again

@rayhchc6451

7 ай бұрын

🗨 justin 🗨 Wow, you're loaded with adjectives! Are ypu always so intense and dramatic? Intrigued or triggered? The Son of Man's job? Yes! Does the Son of Man do His job without involving sons of men? Yes or No? Saints 😇 vs 👹 Goats Talk to me, friend‼️

Why do we have to change anything about the original writing of the word. The older the better.. just explanations of the word in question, ie Greek Hebrew.

There are, actually, places where the Greek might use "aner" rather than "anthropos", and in such cases, to translate as "person" (which would be valid for "anthropos") would be wrong. If the context or language does suggest exclusive masculinism, then gender neutrality in translation is an error.

The debate will not end because, just as there are liberals and conservatives in every other part of life, so it is in this case.

@PostPosties

7 ай бұрын

​@markwardlogos It's not that a more formal methodology can be practiced with precision and purity, it's what the two different camps are aiming to achieve, how successfully they are in accomplishing it, and what the implications are for the reader who has no knowledge of the originals. The only thing conservative in Strauss's methodology is his desire to conserve the original meaning being conveyed. But that is the job of the interpreter, pastor, commentator. On the other end of the spectrum, the LSB is trying to conserve concordance, so the reader/interpreter can have a fighting chance to use the analogy of faith in his daily reading. I'm still fine with calling this a liberal/conservative divide, even though it's a vast spectrum with translators and translations being scattered up and down the line. When you look at the extremes on either end, you see very liberal scholars on one end and very conservative scholars on the other.

Excellent discussion. Just some of my personal thoughts, if I may. NIV is fine, but I typically mention to others that it is still more ‘paraphrase’ than the translation itself admits to. Keeping that in mind keeps me more ‘calm’, if you will. Functional equivalent certainly has its good but how can we be sure it has been applied too far? There are definite cases where this has been done in the NIV. That said, I tend to lean more toward the formal equivalent translations, especially for personal study. The “gender” thing... Yes, there are times when there is even a need to translate ‘men’ into ‘people’ or ‘persons’ but on the other hand, bible students ought to be taught and understand that in biblical culture ‘men’ can sometimes mean ‘people’ in those times. It is helpful that bible students understand the culture, circumstances, etc. was different way back then and, and that, certain biblical scriptures can be more easily understood by learning some awareness of the culture of the bible as it is from any book one reads from. This, rather serendipitously, widens the scope of people’s thinking, which certainly has its advantages as well. The ‘genderism’ in the English 2013 NWT is considered on a verse-by-verse content basis, so there is kind of balance. As for the other 230+ languages the NWT has been translated into, I can’t say for certain, since I don’t know those languages, but I expect it is safe to say, such verses are considered with the same approach. As far as money, the NWT is always available free of charge or for a willful donation that may help with printing costs. Bottom line, as we say enough, using multiple translations is still the best way to go.

Why are the scriptures about the Antichrist distorted and vague? I discovered this when reading the scriptures. Among many many other scriptures being left out and distorted. Do we not regard what is says in Revelation ch 22?