Please stop commenting on Bible translations!
Many can obviously see this isn’t your area of expertise.
Thank you,
Jeff at Scripture Zealot
Barack Obama and the TNIV by John Piper
ESV onlyism and Sproul at Suzanne’s Bookshelf
Please stop commenting on Bible translations!
Many can obviously see this isn’t your area of expertise.
Thank you,
Jeff at Scripture Zealot
Barack Obama and the TNIV by John Piper
ESV onlyism and Sproul at Suzanne’s Bookshelf
I am a big fan of these three men, but I will say that it bugs me that MacArthur frequently preaches from the NKJV. Granted, it’s a great improvement over the KJV, but I would rather hear a different translation. I’m no ESV pusher, but something else please!
I know that Sproul recommends the NKJV along with others and even somebody like me knows that there is much better out there with some of the “flaws” fixed.
I’m a big fan of these three also. Sproul’s writing on prayer and the cross have been very instructive for me and I really like his teaching style. MacArthur got me going on God’s sovereignty and preached on passages I’d never heard preached on. Piper also.
I think they should get some tutoring by D.A. Carson on translations the next time they see him at a conference.
Jeff
Amen! I thoroughly enjoy all of them, but they are not at their best (or any where near it) in translation discussion.
I agree. The problem is, people keep coming up to them and asking which is the best Bible translation. And instead of saying “that’s not my field of expertise”, they give their ‘uneducated’ opinion.
Yeah, they need some tutelage from Don Carson. These guys, whether they know it or not, are dividing the body of Christ.
Jeff: I like your open letter. It reminds me of how I like to keep my phone calls: short and to the point.
Jason: Fee and Strauss make an astute observation in How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth when they say: “…it was decided by some to ‘update’ the KJV by ridding it of its ‘archaic’ way of speaking. But in doing so, the NKJV revisers eliminated the best feature of the KJV (its marvelous expression of the English language) and kept the worst (its flawed text).” (p. 40)
I am going to disagree and say that an open letter to these men is hardly fair. Who has put them up to it? Grudem, Poythress and Packer. These men ought to know better, and they are in a conflict of interest as well. This is the real trouble. Here is an excerpt from a recent article on the topic.
James I. Packer of Regent College in Vancouver served as general editor and chair of the 12-member Translation Oversight Committee. He recently told CC.com the translation grew out of discontent with other modern translations — which, he asserted, tend to “deviate from what was said in several thousand places,” in the interests of lucidity or easy readability.
Now let’s examine some facts. Most Bible insert the masculine pronouns thousands of times. For example,
εἰ δέ τις τῶν ἰδίων καὶ μάλιστα οἰκείων οὐ προνοεῖ, τὴν πίστιν ἤρνηται καὶ ἔστιν ἀπίστου χείρων.
But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. 1 Tim. 5:8 ESV
There are three illegitimately inserted masculine pronouns in this one single verse in the ESV. How on earth can it be called the word of God. I left my church because they refused to ask Dr. Packer not to go on like this. Its a little late to say “Grow up1″ but that is the only comment I feel is remotely adequate.
MacArthur writes attack books on all sorts of things outside his area of expertise. He seems essentially indifferent to truth.
Thank you for this Jeff. I find the TNIV to be outstanding as a translation and urge my students to use it. The bad press it gets is a sad commentary on the scholarship and integrity of those who choose to indulge in such. Many of them have been used in very good and uplifting ways in the Body of the Lord Jesus Christ. However, why would anyone do this when a simple use of this text will reveal how very good, accurate and reliable it is? I have used many translations during the past 30 years of teaching Bible. The TNIV has proven itself to be very good and my comparisons of it and the Greek text have been interesting and refreshing.
Sue, I’m not sure why it’s unfair to say this to these men. EDIT: I see what you’re saying now after reading your comment on Polycarp’s blog.
I’d defer to you on any knowledge of who may be the largest influencers. I don’t want to get into gossip but there sure are a lot of people saying the same seemingly unwarranted things.
I’ve written elsewhere (I can’t even remember where!) about how I agree with your take on 1 Tim. 5:8 although I haven’t done a whole lot of reading on it.
Jeff
I posted the following at Gary Zimmerli’s blog:
I don’t agree with what they say about the TNIV.
That said, they are head and shoulders above most pastors/teachers/theologians regarding most things Biblical/theological. I stand with them wholeheartedly even if we differ on the TNIV.
I would much rather have my theological house in order with a difference regarding translations than the reverse. Rob Bell comes to mind. He likes the TNIV and his theological house sunk in the quicksand years ago.
It’s not an either/or, of course. Don Carson comes to mind here. He likes the TNIV and he knows his theology.
Good point Stan.
Jeff
Not sure if anyone will even read this since I’m responding almost a year later. But, I have read that even the KJV of the Bible has errors. For instance, “hell” is not in the original manuscripts, but rather “Ghena” etc. which refer to the garbage dump outside the city. I’ve also read that “eternity” has not been properly translated. Supposedly the Greek, “Aionon” (sorry, it’s something like that, also words like “Eon”) did not originally mean for an unspecified amount of time, like forever, but rather an allotted amount of time. IF this is true, then people will not be tormented for eternity but rather “reap what they sow” for however long God determines their punishment? Any ideas, thoughts? I’d love to know what others think about this. And yes, btw, I am a born-again believer, not someone just tring to cause trouble but I want to gain insight. Thank You, Sam
Hi Sam,
I’d be careful about just reading what someone says about Greek. Aonion is eternity as far as a simple definition from what I know. But I don’t know much about Greek so I don’t discuss it.
I believe there is more Biblical evidence for eternal hell as opposed to ‘annhialism’ which is what you’re writing about where people are literally destroyed after a certain amount of time. There is big debate on this. But I’m not one to go to for these matters, especially since I’m recovering from surgery.
Maybe someone else here will weigh in.
Jeff
Sam –
You are correct that aion doesn’t have to mean eternity. That’s why it is frequently translated as “age”, the way we would use “iron age”, “industrial age”, “jurassic age”. A lot of the usage (and IMHO a lot of Paul’s usage) has to do with The Platonic year a 22k year astrological cycle caused by the Earth’s axial precession. Also aion has place associations which by analogy you see in modern usage with physics phrase “space time”, which is why translators sometimes use “world” as a lazy shorthand when translating aion.
Really though how to translate aion is a broader question:
Is Paul writing a Hellenistic book about Hellenistic topics using Hellenistic ideas
or
Is Paul writing a Christian book about Christian topics using Christian ideas
The arguments for annihilationism are fairly good if you assume the former and not the later. The are not so good if you assume the later. In other words you argument regarding aion is not specific to aion.
Should translation be Christianized? I blogged about another example which is less controversial recently Venus translation vs. transulturation.