Quotes (559)

Gary Gilley Today, virtually every heresy found in the Christian ranks can be traced back to some form of rejection of the Bible as God’s final authority. It may be pragmatism (which adds success to the Bible); mysticism (which adds experience); tradition (which adds the past): legalism (which adds man’s rules); or philosophy such as psychology (which adds man’s wisdom). The end result is all the same: the Word of God takes a back seat to the inventions and imaginations of men.

- Gary Gilley

10 thoughts on “Quotes (559)

  1. What about adventism (seventh day, jehovah’s witnesses…)? They believe the bible is the final authority and in keeping with that they dismiss the creeds and church tradition.

  2. CD-host,

    I cant say much for seventh day adventists but I do know that JW’s dont believe the Bible.

    Sure they believe their ‘Bible’ but the JW ‘Bible’ is not the word of God.

    It is a rank effort by uneducated men.

  3. Matthew —

    The seventh day adventists up until recently use the King James exclusively. The King James is still what their Ellen White study bible uses, which is a denominational study bible. Lately many churches and individuals have started switching over to the Clear Word Translation for their popular bibles which is a very loose paraphrase (similar to the The Message, but with more of a theological orientation). The Clear Word isn’t officially endorsed but this is a movement from below.

    The Jehovah’s Witnesses use the NA26 for their Greek and the MT for the Hebrew. So the same underlying text as most Protestant bibles from 40 years ago. The NWT is a standard mediating translation with some theological overrides. Essentially the same sort of thing conservative protestants do when they read the NT back into the OT (i.e. Isaiah 7:14), but they have a substantially different theology. The NWT is getting old, and I would say most Protestant bibles today are more accurate, but it vastly more accurate than the bibles most people were using in 1961 like the KJV, Darby, TLB (about a decade later)…. It has a terrible reputation because there is tremendous amount of focus on a few verses having to do with Arianism and annihilationism where Protestants and Witnesses disagree and yes those verses are questionable translations. On the other hand because they don’t have to defend the creeds there hundreds of other verses where they can translate much more faithfully to the Greek and Hebrew.

    They also publish and make freely available the Kingdom Interlinear which as far as I know is the one of the best NA26 interlinears around. This clearly documents places where theological overrides occurred in the NWT. I don’t mean to pick a fight but if you compare the KIT to the ESV-Reverse interlinear which is fundamentally apologetic in nature and does not document the theological translation in the ESV I don’t see how conservative Protestants have much room to complain about Witnesses.

  4. It has a terrible reputation because there is tremendous amount of focus on a few verses having to do with Arianism and annihilationism where Protestants and Witnesses disagree and yes those verses are questionable translations. On the other hand because they don’t have to defend the creeds there hundreds of other verses where they can translate much more faithfully to the Greek and Hebrew.

    You’re kidding, right? The whole foundation of the process of producing the rubbish that are the NWT and the KIT is the theology of the Watchtower. None of the translators had ANY training in biblical Greek or Hebrew. In every verse they translated, while they don’t have to defend the creeds they DO have to defend their theology–and it was this theology that was the only thing guiding them. In fact, no reputable Bible scholar takes the NWT or the KIT seriously.

    They also publish and make freely available the Kingdom Interlinear which as far as I know is the one of the best NA26 interlinears around.

    Uh, not quite

  5. Fourpointer —

    I’m reading the page you sent. I’ll use PW for the author of the MMOutreach page

    John 8:58 — He is agreeing with KIT, it should be “I am”. The footnote is about the NWT which correctly identifies the “I have been” (present perfect continuous aspect) in English. PW didn’t understand the footnote here, he thinks it is talking about the Greek verb tense.
    One can disagree with the NWT’s choice on tenses, and I personally would (see for example my post on handling aorist tense using ebonics), but I can’t see any reason to be critical of the KIT for correctly translating and then correctly footnoting the tense change on the NWT.

    John 17:3 — PW is agreeing with the KIT
    John 20:28 — Image missing
    Col 1:26 — Again PW is agreeing with the KIT
    Col 2:9 — PW throws fit about the change form the 1969 KIT’s “godship” to the 1985 “divinity” when translating theotes. As he mentions the ’69 edition was using a 19th century word and most protestant bibles today translate that as “divinity”, including the ESV. This strikes me as a bogus objection.

    I could keep going but I don’t see much evidence here that the KIT is doing a bad job. I could do far better than this attacking any interlinear on the market.

  6. CD-Host,

    The reason the WTBTS translated John 8:58 the way they did was not because they knew about any technical nuances of Greek–because they knew NOTHING about biblical Greek. The reason they translate as “I have been” is so they can continue to believe that Jesus is not referring to Himself as God. If He was simply saying He had been alive since before Abraham, this would not have caused the Pharisees to take up stones for blasphemy.

    In all the KIT is a shabby attempt at biblical scholarship, and is good for nothing more than leading people to Hell through error and heresy–things the WTBTS is an expert at teaching.

  7. fourpointer —

    I assume by WTBTS you mean the NWT. We are talking about 4 different bibles here:
    NA26 Greek
    1969 KIT
    1985 KIT
    NWT
    It would be easier if you specified which one.

    As for you not agreeing with the tense change in John 8:58, yes I’m against tense changes. Are you as passionately against tense changes in Protestant bibles?

  8. Well, considering you don’t care much for Scriptural authority, repentance, or holiness (based on what I have read at your website), I think any further conversation between us would be moot. So, basically, I will simply answer your question and call it a day.

    I assume by WTBTS you mean the NWT. We are talking about 4 different bibles here:
    NA26 Greek
    1969 KIT
    1985 KIT
    NWT

    No, by WTBTS I mean the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society–the group of heretics that is supposedly ” God’s channel” and has foisted their abominations upon the world. The fact that “God’s organization” has made so many changes in their doctrine and “Scriptures” is an indication they have no clue what they are doing.

    Farewell.

  9. fourpointer —

    OK for the purpose of argument, lets grant I’m not one of the elect regarding my personal holiness. That doesn’t have anything to do with my passionate desire for accuracy in bible translation.

    Let me just point out the structure of your argument:

    CD: The KIT is pretty good for a free 60s interlinear
    four: No it is terrible, see this list of errors
    CD: Those aren’t errors in the KIT, at worst they are errors in the NWT that are properly documented in the KIT.
    four: The WTBTS are stupid and evil, and CD is evil (possibly stupid).

    Now I get that you all aren’t part of the same denomination and you don’t like their translation choices. And I’m not going to continue to force you to debate. But do you really think argument by assertion and insult is likely to be effective in convincing anyone of the truth of your beliefs?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s