TILL
Of course, they don't, and that is the whole point. A study of the latest
translations will show that many highly publicized biblical discrepancies
have been translated away. When the KJV and ASV were translated, this
particular problem had received very little attention. After all, until
fairly recently one questioned the integrity of the Bible at his own risk.
As Christianity lost control of governmental reins, skeptics became more
open about criticizing the Bible, so recent translations have addressed
these many of criticisms by translating them away. And it works on the
gullible who don't take the time to do research.
Let's take the Septuagint as an example. This Greek translation of the OT
was done in the 3rd century B.C. At that time, knowledge of textual
discrepancies wasn't even a factor for translators to consider. So how did
the Septuagint translators render Isaiah 45:7? They used the Greek word
"kakia" for "rah." This is a Greek word that meant "evil, malice,
naughtiness, wickedness." Brenton's translation of the Septuagint renders
the verse like this: "I am he that prepared light, and formed darkness; who
make peace, and create evil." Hmmmmm.
MATTHEW
Why is this? Certainly, it is not caused by trying to read into the verse
what the Christian believes.
TILL
Why, heavens, no! Perish the thought! Would Christian translators ever be
guilty of tying to read into the verses what they believe? Maybe Matthew
can explain why "Christian translators" ignored the Masoretic text and gave
Ahaziah's age in 2 Chronicles 22:2 as 22 rather than 42, as the Hebrew text
reads. If that isn't reading into the verse what they believe, then what is it?
MATTHEW
I don't think that the NAS would do this.
TILL
Explain why you think this? If I said, "I think that the NAS translators
put into this version what they personally believed," wouldn't Matthew want
me to support that with evidence? You know, it gets a little tiresome seeing
Matthew's assertions for which he offers no supporting proof, as if he
expects us to accept his mere word as proof. Well, needless to say,
Matthew's mere word is one of the last proofs I would accept, because he has
time and time again proven himself to be so biased for biblical inerrancy
that he will say just about anything to try to shore it up.
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net
====================================================================
For help, send a message to errancy-request@infidels.org with the word
"help" in the subject or body of your message. To unsubscribe from
ERRANCY, send a message to errancy-request@infidels.org with the word
"unsubscribe" in the subject or body of your message.