Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Private Interpretations | 2 Pet 1:20 | EdB | 234671 | ||
BradK I probably miss a lot in life but I have been following the recent discussions. My thoughts, fringe groups continue to exist only when "non fringe groups" fail to provide sufficient evidence that shows their fringe ideas are groundless and are without merit. Squelching them does not resolve the issue, in fact just the opposite. In many people's mind they question why this so called “fringe group” was squelched instead of dealt with. Now I agree the Study Bible Forum was not intended to be a soapbox to be used by people to forward an agenda contrary to orthodox Christianity or to bring in to question true Christianity or the Holy Scriptures. I also agree there are some differences in doctrine so volatile that they can't be discuss civilly and therefore need to be avoided on this forum. But questions such as why did the majority of translators translated this verse this way and that verse that way even though it might be "fringe" to you should be addressed. I personally learned a lot from a recent discussion which I am sure fell into the "fringe" category, in which Tim's response to me on aspects of Greek I had long forgotten or managed to avoid learning in the first place made me appreciate a understanding of scripture I had long questioned. |
||||||
2 | Private Interpretations | 2 Pet 1:20 | BradK | 234677 | ||
Hello Edb, I read your response. Thank you for the comments. You said, "But questions such as why did the majority of translators translated this verse this way and that verse that way even though it might be "fringe" to you should be addressed. " Can you or would you be willing to provide such helpful input on this matter for the edificstion of the Forum? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
3 | Private Interpretations | 2 Pet 1:20 | EdB | 234680 | ||
Bradk Oh I usually offer my opinion but people like Tim Moran who evidently took Hebrew and Greek more serious in seminary are better able to answer these type questions. Here is the problem, since the reformation people have been lead to believe they can interpret scripture for themselves. A view that horrified even Luther when he realized what was loosed. Couple that with a Strong's concordance which is a concordance and not a dictionary of Greek and Hebrew words. People using the Strong’s look up a word, see it was translated 95 ways to Sunday and decide that it is valid for them to pick any of the 95, they then use one that tends to support their opinion of what scripture is saying in a particular contested passage. It takes a solid understanding of the original language to know and fully understand why a word is translated as it was, why the sentence structure implies what it does, and what valid assumptions should be made about this passage. Unfortunately that criterion was never mentioned when it was decided man could interpret scripture for himself. For years people realized there was more to interpretation than just randomly picking a possible translation from a list found in Strong and plugging it in and relied on the translators to do the job correctly. However in our age of conspiracy everyone is sure anything established must have been done covertly and must be questioned. That is why a forum such as Lockman’s StudyBible forum is so important, so scholars like Tim Moran and others can provide answers to questions like why the translators translated this verse this way and that verse that way. I believe the NASB is an excellent translation and can and should be used for the study of scripture. I further believe it is capable of surviving all scrutiny and when a question is brought up it should be dealt with instead of simply being squelched and sent into limbo. |
||||||