So if i go through the bible, and change things due to "translation errors" will you believe me?

Question

just like thou shall not kill vs thou shall not murder, it seems that "translation error" is so easily acceptable, so why not hundereds of other laws and "truths" in the bible, whos to say we cant just go through it, completely redo the bible, and say it was mistranslated. Why stop at kill vs murder. Lets keep it going.

Answer 1

be my guest, the whole thing is full of errors.
Some of the things, I don't even remember god saying. (he told me-that's that lol)
Such as manifest destination. I mean...wow, it worked, but I don't think god wanted someone to just take the land without reason...indians are people too, but the new world explorers didn't think so. same for the africans...eh, they arn't people.

The bible influenced all of that? wow....

Answer 2

The NWT is the most bias version of a Bible ever written. It was written to conform to their ideals and concepts. I personally feel it was written in order to fulfill their goals of their printed material in which that base prosperity upon. Here is an example of such bias renderings, and yet there are so many more. John 1:1 NWT- “In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” Literal Greek Text- “ In beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward the God, and God was the Word.” Of all the scriptures in the NWT, this one in particular makes Christians cringe the most. The difference is obvious. Notice that their is no “a” in the Greek text before the last rendering of “god”. It has been inserted into the NWT. Why? The Watchtower argument from p.1139 of the 1985 KIT goes like this: “.... because the Greek word ....(theos) is a singular predicate noun occurring before the verb and is not preceded by the definite article.” What this means is that since the definite article, the, is before the first mention of God but not the second, and the verb, was, is after the second mention of god, then the rendering “a god” is justified. (If you’re thoroughly confused, don’t worry.) This is a perfect example of the Watchtower making up a grammatical rule and only applying it when it fits their theology. If they applied this rule to the rest of the New Testament, the outcome would be ridiculous. The following are some examples of how a few scriptures would turn out in the book of John if they applied their rule consistently: John 1:12 “However, as many as did receive him, to them he gave authority to become a god’s children.” John 1:13 “and they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from a god’s.” John 1:18 “No man has seen a god at any time....”. John 3:2 “....Rabbi, we know that you as a teacher have come from a god....” Obviously, the Watchtower has gone to great lengths to deny the Deity of Christ. They are hard-pressed to find any reputable source to agree with their translation of John 1:1. (see article Does the Watchtower Endorse Spirit Mediums) Even B.F. Westcott, whose Greek text is used in the KIT and is the basis for the NWT, doesn’t agree with them. He said, “The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in iv.24. It is necessarily without the article (theos not ho theos) inasmuch as it describes the nature of the Word and does not identify His Person....No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word.” The Gospel According to St. John (Eerdmans, 1958 reprint), p.3. Similarly, Greek scholar Dr. Julius R. Mantey, who was quoted in the 1969 KIT p.1159, called the Watchtower’s rendering of this verse, “A grossly misleading translation.” In summary, it is obvious that the NWT is not an honest translation. The Watchtower has secretly smuggled in their own peculiar doctrines to the scriptures by paraphrasing and changing verses where necessary. No wonder why the Watchtower won‘t reveal the names of the men on the “New World Translation Committee”. Who would want to take the blame? Finally, one must wonder what kind of organization can publish such a corrupted translation and say in their publication, All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial, “The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures is a faithful translation of God’s Word....” p. 331. And, “Thanks be to God that he has provided the New World Translation, with its clear and accurate Bible text.” p.327 Please read in the link that I provided:

Answer 3

Why do you think there are so many different translations on the shelf? People are keeping it going. As the English language changes and new manuscript evidence is uncovered, publishers are struggling to keep up with up-to-date translations. I can't help if the Hebrew language has different words for "kill" and "murder." That is just a fact, and no amount of wishful thinking will change that fact. You can either structure your arguments around current scholarship on the subject, or you can just make it up as you go along.

Answer 4

Any document written in another language needs translated.

Any language, like English, whose meanings of words can change over time, need to be researched and re-interpreted as appropriate.

The Bible is no different.
For the most part, recent Bibles do a very good job in translatiing the original Greek and Hebrew. It is a gross exaggeration to claim the Bible cannot be understood in absolute terms, or understood at all, because of translation inaccuracies.

Answer 5

Only if you have proof. Get me someone who studied ancient Hebrew, as most Bible Scholars do, and have them interpret the old texts. If they think there is a mistranslation, I will listen.

However, I tend to think you do NOT know ancient Hebrew, and nether do I, so we are not knowledgeable enough to declare mistranslations.

As for the guy above me, neither was Martin Luther, which is why the King James Bible isn't true to the old text. He modified it to suit his needs, and omitted books he did not agree with. Unfortunately, he did this at a time where the Catholic Church was corrupt, so people actually listened to him. It's sad really.

Answer 6

Sure keep going but do us a favor first.

Become educated in the original languages.

Don't stop there, further your education into the historical and cultural context in which these documents were written.

Oh yea learn something of textual criticism so that you will actually know what you are looking at, what it means and where it came from.

Actually learn how to exegete from the manuscripts in the languages in which the documents were written.

When you are done with that, then you can begin to speak of possible errors.

Answer 7

I would encourage that. Of course if you're not fluent in Hebrew, the language of the original Torah, it would be quite a difficult task. If you are, as I am... it's a really interesting prospect, but you have to remember: in all translations, there's some degree of subjectivity. Still, it's something I'd love to do given the ample time, and something I encourage all to try.

Answer 8

It would depend on how you fixed it and your credibility as a translator. As there are several versions out that are reasonably accurate, it would be a waste of time for you to do it. Granted, many people will and do still choose to use less accurate versions.

Another translation will not produce any more evidence to support it though.

Answer 9

1st, tcjstn is correct. Neither "kill' nor "murder" is a "translation error" in this instance. "Murder" is, in my opinion, a *superior* translation (more accurately portrays the meaning of the verse), but "kill" is most certainly a valid (accurate) translation. Surely, you realize that "murder" is a form of "killing"?

So, although translation error is likely to be present, it is *very* difficult to detect (after all, the guys doing this are experts in their field). I doubt that you, or I, would be able to detect any translation *error* in *any* scholarly translation of the bible.

Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/

Answer 10

Just like anything, translation and interpretation are key. We don't throw out the Constitution because of the occasional challenge of interpreting it correctly do we? But the greatest truth is that only through God can we understand the Scriptures. As it is written in the Book of Luke, "Jesus opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures."

Answer 11

It's NOT a translation error, genius. It's a bad rendering. You know what that means? That means that while it is a sin to kill, murder is the more specific version of that. It is God's right alone to decide who lives and who dies, so your abortion and death penalty example from the last question is null and void.