Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | ESV opinion poll | Ps 119:105 | srbaegon | 33694 | ||
Hank, The following is a message he posted to the CBMW website in reaction to their denunciation of TNIV. Quote Randy Stinson accuses the TNIV: "Another example is found in John 11:25. Jesus in the TNIV says "Anyone who believesin me will live, even though they die." Again the plural "they" is substituted for the generic "he." Not only does this convolute the personal nature of the relationship between a person and Christ, but it betrays the fact that Jesus himselfused the generic "he" even though he was speaking to a woman (Martha)." My Greek New Testament has no generic "he" in John 11:25. Where does Randy find a generic "he"? There is no generic "he" in the Greek language. Greek verbs are not inflected for gender. Let's be honest, folks! Let's not be driven by any ideology, whether it be be that of the male representation camp or feminists. Let's simply translate the Bible accurately. A concerned Bible translator myself. There are a number of linguistic inaccuracies on your CBMW website about the TNIV. One of them is confusing English grammatical number of "they" and "them" with referential number. If you would do a careful linguistic analyis of current English, you would discover that many English speakers use "they" as a generic pronoun, referentially number-indifferent, just as "they" has functioned that way in the past in English and impersonal pronouns and "they" pronouns so function in other languages. Please, please, dear brother and sisters, do not accuse your fellow Christians of things which they have not done. Let's be accurate when we speak about the Greek language of the NT. And let's be accurate when we speak about English. Let's not impose our own views of English on those who may speak a different dialect. There is no single correct way to speak English. I happen to be currently critiquing a gender-new gender-noninclusive Bible translation. By that I mean the team that is translating is dead-set against translating gender references in the Bible according to modern social movements. But even this team, due to their scholarly honesty, has to translate truly gender-inclusive referential meaning in the Greek with English which is gender-inclusive. And this is allowed for by the Colorado guidelines. The matter of he/they is not based on solid descriptive linguistic analysis. It is based on the opinions of those who speak a form of English which I was taught, also, but which has changed over the years, just as all languages change. And PLEASE do not keep accusing me or anyone else of being a willing or unaware participant in any feminist movement. You're simply wrong and falsely reading our minds and hearts, if you do that. I beg of you to remove all inaccuracies from recent posts about the TNIV. It's not a perfect translation. And for sure the ESV isn't (it is a very poor translation, with many lexical ungrammaticalities). Let's try to listen to each other, rather than practicing mind-reading and divining motives. And, most of all, let's have accuracy as our highest goal in translation, not accuracy as defined by our own ideologies (including those of Wayne Grudem) but accuracy based on the how the original biblical language really work. Let's not confuse important linguistic issues like grammatical categories with referential semantic categories. I would encourage each of you who want to criticize another English version to first absorb one or two good textbooks on linguistics and Bible translation. By doing so, there can be more genuine discussion about the issues and alot less confusing smoke. Endquote Steve |
||||||
2 | ESV opinion poll | Ps 119:105 | Makarios | 33813 | ||
Greetings again, Steve, I most certainly disagree with the conclusions that your friend has reached, and I believe that CBMW (and Randy Stinson) is correct in their evaluation of the TNIV. One thing that your friend must realize, is that Zondervan/IBS already tried this once (in 1997), and the reaction was not all that different then from what it is today. Also, there are at least 26 Bible scholars, including J.I. Packer (editor of the ESV) and James Dobson who oppose the publication of the TNIV and cannot recommend it for use by the church (http://www.baptistpress.com). So the criticism of the TNIV is not unfounded, nor does it only come from one direction. Blessings to you and your friend, Makarios |
||||||