How Many More?

[Bit Brush]

My question is simple. How many more versions of the bible will there be before we one right? Seems every time a scholar thinks they have a better version to correct the problems with the previous versions they publish it? How many English bibles do we have now? Now some of the reasons to publish include readability, better scholarship on older witnesses, making a more accurate thought for thought or word for word version, etc, etc.

One last question. Should there be a super committee formed of all the current and soon to be bible scholars who have or will soon have versions published? Where they all agree to peer review everyone's work? Where all such works are condensed into two final works being one thought for thought and one word for word? No individual work will be published. No versions need be published other than these two version for many many years or until the language significantly changes again. What do you think?

I see such a work unifying all the churches, promoting memorization again, increased study, understanding and individual reading. A good thing right?

[Daniel]

Again with the bible corrections idea?  What happened to suggestion of a forum post on whether a single translation can be perfect and further translations in that language would all be "messing with" or "correcting" "the Bible"?  

Now I like the "Can't we all agree" idea.  I think it would provide for unity.  But I am not sure how that would work unless it was a public domain edition. And I am not sure what it would solve.  You would still have folks argue over which of the two final works were the best.  You'd still have folks claiming that one was "causing confusion".  And you'd still have folks that have an emotional attachment to some old translation and would want to use that instead of the "unity" versions.  But the biggest problem is that some goal of unity should not be our goal and likely not even be possible.  If a bunch of Mike Heiser's got into a room and came out with a translation that said "When God began to create" in Genesis 1:1, it wouldn't really matter if that was a consensus of the brainy guys on the committee.  It *isn't* the consensus of what many people think/believe today and therefore folks would not be unity to accept it.  There are just too many leaders out there with some pet persuasion that is based on a specific wording of the text.  Many people would say the new "Unity Bible" is wrong because the [insert favored translation here] Bible properly says X.  Which brings us back full circle and to the discussion of why some people believe that X translation is the "proper" on to which others should be compared for accuracy.  

[Jax Agnesson]

Sorry to bring up the same old question again, but here goes:

Does not the fact that we don't have just one clear unambiguous message demonstrate that an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, not subject to our time-frames, does not intend that we should have, (today)  just one clear unambiguous message?

[Jack]

 Since language is continually changing, there will be a need for revised Bibles. Have any of you ever tried to read Tyndale's Bible?

 The KJV is now, over 400 years old, and if we had to rely on that as the only English translation, we'd be in a confused Christianity. (I apologize to any KJVO'ers reading this)

 I believe that having multiple accurate Bibles, in our language, is a benefit to our proper understanding, because many English words have different meanings to English readers, due to their Geographical dialects. Dij  Y'll catch that?

 I have a N.T. Polyglot: turn a page, and you'll see seven different English translations and the Greek original.

Sometimes, where there is a difference, you may make a discovery: I never got the real meaning from that passage, using my favorite translation.

[Daniel]

Jax Agnesson said:

Does not the fact that we don't have just one clear unambiguous message demonstrate that an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, not subject to our time-frames, does not intend that we should have, (today)  just one clear unambiguous message?

I think that is part of it.  I mean, logically, the same challenge over so many translations causing confusion can also be made about so many books in the Bible and wouldn't we better off if we just had John (as an example) without Matthew, Mark, and Luke causing so much confusion with different takes on things.

[JRKH]

Jack,

You bring up a good point here re: evolving language and cultural dialects etc...

And the advantage that multiple translations have in helping people make deeper discoveries.  Trying looking at different translations - and some words that are habitually NOT translated, caused me to go looking at the Greek and Hebrew....

Peace

James

Jack said:

 Since language is continually changing, there will be a need for revised Bibles. Have any of you ever tried to read Tyndale's Bible?

 The KJV is now, over 400 years old, and if we had to rely on that as the only English translation, we'd be in a confused Christianity. (I apologize to any KJVO'ers reading this)

 I believe that having multiple accurate Bibles, in our language, is a benefit to our proper understanding, because many English words have different meanings to English readers, due to their Geographical dialects. Dij  Y'll catch that?

 I have a N.T. Polyglot: turn a page, and you'll see seven different English translations and the Greek original.

Sometimes, where there is a difference, you may make a discovery: I never got the real meaning from that passage, using my favorite translation.

[JRKH]

Well, I don't agree that we don't and in fact, regardless of the translation, that clear and unambiguous message is right there in the the Bible - Mt 22:36-40 - is totally clear and gives us the "key", the "root" for understanding everything else as it pertains to how we as Christians are to live. 

Now certainly there are a lot of things that are ambiguous but they tend to be things not so directly connected to our daily journey.  In these things, perhaps you are right and God does not intend that we have full and clear understanding....Frankly I think He knows that we have our hands full just trying to live the Law of Love. 

Peace

James

Jax Agnesson said:

Sorry to bring up the same old question again, but here goes:

Does not the fact that we don't have just one clear unambiguous message demonstrate that an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, not subject to our time-frames, does not intend that we should have, (today)  just one clear unambiguous message?

[JRKH]

In direct answer to the OP, this is one of the advantages that we as Catholics have.

All of the Catholic versions are done by committee and reviewed before publishing.

I'm not saying that there isn't still occasionally problems - like whether to use "gender neutral" language - but in the Catholic world, that which you propose in your OP already occurs. 

Peace

James

[Daniel]

There are multiple translations that are the work of a team or committee.  I think the point of the OP was that we should get ALL the different teams and individuals together and get them to agree on everything.

JRKH said:

In direct answer to the OP, this is one of the advantages that we as Catholics have.

All of the Catholic versions are done by committee and reviewed before publishing.

I'm not saying that there isn't still occasionally problems - like whether to use "gender neutral" language - but in the Catholic world, that which you propose in your OP already occurs. 

Peace

James

[Marv]

"...of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh." (Ecc. 12:12)

 

This evidently includes translations. I suspect there never will be an end to English-language translations. There cannot be a perfect translation, if for no other reason than than translation itself is an imperfect process, at best.

 

What greater tribute can there be to an ancient text that that multitudes of scholars should undertake to study it minutely and work to express its meaning in their own language? It would be convenient, perhaps, if one ideal one could be chosen to serve as the standard authority in English. But who has the authority to declare it so? And on what basis would this authority make that declaration? And would this authorization cover all dialects of English? And would this authorization necessarily have an expiration date, given that the English language will inevitably change and no one can say how and how quickly and at what point todays newly authorized version will no longer serve that future form of the language?

[Jax Agnesson]

Very fair answer. Think I get yr point. All best. Jax.

JRKH said:

Well, I don't agree that we don't and in fact, regardless of the translation, that clear and unambiguous message is right there in the the Bible - Mt 22:36-40 - is totally clear and gives us the "key", the "root" for understanding everything else as it pertains to how we as Christians are to live. 

Now certainly there are a lot of things that are ambiguous but they tend to be things not so directly connected to our daily journey.  In these things, perhaps you are right and God does not intend that we have full and clear understanding....Frankly I think He knows that we have our hands full just trying to live the Law of Love. 

Peace

James

Jax Agnesson said:

Sorry to bring up the same old question again, but here goes:

Does not the fact that we don't have just one clear unambiguous message demonstrate that an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, not subject to our time-frames, does not intend that we should have, (today)  just one clear unambiguous message?

[JRKH]

I'd love to see it happen. 

Just thinking....Some of the ecumenical councils took many many years to complete their work...I wonder how long it would take an "Ecumenical Council on a Common English Translation" to come to agreement. 

Peace

James

Daniel said:

There are multiple translations that are the work of a team or committee.  I think the point of the OP was that we should get ALL the different teams and individuals together and get them to agree on everything.

JRKH said:

In direct answer to the OP, this is one of the advantages that we as Catholics have.

All of the Catholic versions are done by committee and reviewed before publishing.

I'm not saying that there isn't still occasionally problems - like whether to use "gender neutral" language - but in the Catholic world, that which you propose in your OP already occurs. 

Peace

James

[Daniel]

It would take years just to decide who should be ON the council. LOL

JRKH said:

Some of the ecumenical councils took many many years to complete their work...I wonder how long it would take an "Ecumenical Council on a Common English Translation" to come to agreement.