The power of one word

[Guest man]

You know, you can't discuss the changing of one single word without discussing the translation in which that word appears.

If you feel that that one single word distorts the truth, it would only be wise to point out which translation it can be found in. And it would be just as wise to point out the translations we feel to be correct and our reasons for it.

If there's a white elephant standing in the middle of your living room, it has to be acknowledged.

[Fez]

If there's a white elephant standing in the middle of your living room, it has to be acknowledged.

I disagree, elephants are grey. But I guess it's in the translation.

[pokemaughan]

You know, you can't discuss the changing of one single word without discussing the translation in which that word appears.

If you feel that that one single word distorts the truth, it would only be wise to point out which translation it can be found in. And it would be just as wise to point out the translations we feel to be correct and our reasons for it.

If there's a white elephant standing in the middle of your living room, it has to be acknowledged.

I agree! Some 'translations' like The Message and the like should be cast into the 'no-no' bin. And in fact every translation you choose to read should be evaluated to some point, because all are works of men.

But I don't know about you, but I hate getting indirectly browbeaten by every post Butero makes. I'm pretty adamant about this... I'm not bugged just 'because'. These are things I've spent a lot of time researching it from both sides and it just bugs me to death that the KJVO crowd still thinks that way. It's almost like another form of racism. It just screams ignorance and drives me nuts!

[Guest man]

If there's a white elephant standing in the middle of your living room, it has to be acknowledged.

I disagree, elephants are grey. But I guess it's in the translation.

http://servusman.com/Pictures/DSC02179.JPG

[Guest Butero]

I hope you will equally acknowledge that everything I posted was on topic?

Yessir, but the KJVO-rap is like a loud buzzing in my ears that's hard to overlook.

It's an instant turnoff. I once heard a preacher on the radio. It started off like this. "I believe in the Word of God, the King James Bible..." Instantly turned it off with a cringe in my eye.

Listen, what if someone came into your discussion on translation or whatnot and went something like this:

"In the Word of God, the New International Version, it says that..." "I listed other translations but the NIV is still the only one I'll use" "Now if we'd stop using those darned old-age translations and use the NIV..." "The NIV doesn't have that word, which is why I don't read anything else..." "Oh and I only read the NIV..." "The NIV is the only Bible translation in my view..."

Now from your point of view, the NIV is horsecrap. How annoyed would you be to see someone saying such 'ignorant' things over and over and over?

I'm trying to be polite about this. I really am.

I am as turned off to those who use new translations as you are to those who attack them. If I hear a minister quoting from new translations, I generally write them off as not worth wasting my time listening to. I get what you are saying. The only thing I am saying is that Bible translations directly relate to the question over this one word we are debating. We have a list of 11 translations that One Light, meaning to or not, exposed as being in error. We then have a list of 8 translations that seem to give an ok rendering of the verse in question. Everything he asked in the OP I addressed, and then got slammed for doing so. I am saying if someone doesn't want to discuss something fully, then that needs to be made plain in the original post, not after a reply is made, and I would take this further and suggest that if someone doesn't want all possible answers expolored, they shouldn't start a thread in the first place. If you go back to post #24, you will see I directly addressed the OP, and if you will further go back to my first response, you will also see I was on topic there as well.

I don't like people going off topic either, but I also find it annoying when I am on topic and get slammed because someone doesn't like my opinion. You consider my KJV only view ignorant, and I feel like those using new translations are the ones who are ignorant. You consider it annoying when people keep slamming new translations over and over and I consider it annoying when people keep defending new translations over and over. On that we will never agree. The question is, did I address the topic being discussed or go off into left field? I believe I was on topic, and you admitted that is the case. If I was on topic, then I was simply offering one possible answer to the question posed in the OP. Had nobody come in after me and attacked my opinion, and simply offered other explainations, the controversy would have ended, and we wouldn't have this continued going back and forth now. Instead, I got slammed for my opinion, because it is not PC enough.

[Guest man]

You know, you can't discuss the changing of one single word without discussing the translation in which that word appears.

If you feel that that one single word distorts the truth, it would only be wise to point out which translation it can be found in. And it would be just as wise to point out the translations we feel to be correct and our reasons for it.

If there's a white elephant standing in the middle of your living room, it has to be acknowledged.

I agree! Some 'translations' like The Message and the like should be cast into the 'no-no' bin. And in fact every translation you choose to read should be evaluated to some point, because all are works of men.

But I don't know about you, but I hate getting indirectly browbeaten by every post Butero makes. I'm pretty adamant about this... I'm not bugged just 'because'. These are things I've spent a lot of time researching it from both sides and it just bugs me to death that the KJVO crowd still thinks that way. It's almost like another form of racism. It just screams ignorance and drives me nuts!

My advice to you is to ignore it......I do.

Why chance a stumble over something you cannot change.

[pokemaughan]

I am as turned off to those who use new translations as you are to those who attack them. If I hear a minister quoting from new translations, I generally write them off as not worth wasting my time listening to. I get what you are saying. The only thing I am saying is that Bible translations directly relate to the question over this one word we are debating. We have a list of 11 translations that One Light, meaning to or not, exposed as being in error. We then have a list of 8 translations that seem to give an ok rendering of the verse in question. Everything he asked in the OP I addressed, and then got slammed for doing so. I am saying if someone doesn't want to discuss something fully, then that needs to be made plain in the original post, not after a reply is made, and I would take this further and suggest that if someone doesn't want all possible answers expolored, they shouldn't start a thread in the first place. If you go back to post #24, you will see I directly addressed the OP, and if you will further go back to my first response, you will also see I was on topic there as well.

I don't like people going off topic either, but I also find it annoying when I am on topic and get slammed because someone doesn't like my opinion. You consider my KJV only view ignorant, and I feel like those using new translations are the ones who are ignorant. You consider it annoying when people keep slamming new translations over and over and I consider it annoying when people keep defending new translations over and over. On that we will never agree. The question is, did I address the topic being discussed or go off into left field? I believe I was on topic, and you admitted that is the case. If I was on topic, then I was simply offering one possible answer to the question posed in the OP. Had nobody come in after me and attacked my opinion, and simply offered other explainations, the controversy would have ended, and we wouldn't have this continued going back and forth now. Instead, I got slammed for my opinion, because it is not PC enough.

Alright Butero, we're on the same page. Let's leave at that. I see myself getting more frustrated if I go on.

Maybe we can schedule a debate in the future?

[OneLight]

καυχάομαι

kauchaomai

kow-khah'-om-ahee

From some (obsolete) base akin to that of αὐχέω aucheō (to boast) ; to vaunt (in a good or a bad sense): - (make) boast, glory, joy, rejoice

Guess from the Greek it can mean 4 or 5 things all with a slightly different meaning. I guess that maybe the word boast may have had a different connotation to that which we put on it now?

It also could mean that they used the same word for different reasons. Form my studies, older languages had less words to deal with, so more definitions were placed on each word. Keeping this in mind, which definition above better translates to what you feel best fits the meaning of scripture? I would think rejoice better fits. Even though other words can be used through translation, rejoice, to me, best fits what we do in Christ. Boast, proud, pride and brag should not be in the makeup of a Christian. These words do not resemble humility.

[Guest Butero]

But I don't know about you, but I hate getting indirectly browbeaten by every post Butero makes. I'm pretty adamant about this... I'm not bugged just 'because'. These are things I've spent a lot of time researching it from both sides and it just bugs me to death that the KJVO crowd still thinks that way. It's almost like another form of racism. It just screams ignorance and drives me nuts!

Talk about an offensive comment? You are not the only one that has researched this Pokemaughan. Many of us on the KJV side of the isle have researched this as well, and don't agree with your conclusions. Comparing this to racism is totally nuts. Then you come out with the comment that really answers where you stand. You said, "it just bugs me to death that the KJVO crowd still thinks that way." In other words, I guess to you, we are the Archie Bunker types, and you are the educated one who really knows the truth? This same kind of argument is often times used by people who worship idols towards Christians. They will talk about how it bugs them that racist types like us are ignorantly descriminating against them. The homosexuals say the same thing against those they consider intollerant bigots for holding to the Biblical teachings on sodomy. I am glad you posted this because it explains where you are coming from. It bugs you that after hearing all the enlightened comments from educated people like you that have fully researched new translations and decided they were good, there are still ignorant people like me that won't go along. I am glad to see we have this straightened out.

[nebula]

...Even though other words can be used through translation, rejoice, to me, best fits what we do in Christ. Boast, proud, pride and brag should not be in the makeup of a Christian. These words do not resemble humility.

OK, so from that perspective -

Where Paul talks about boasting in the cross of Christ -

Do you believe a different word should be used as well?