Dear E-Brethren,
I became interested in reading your postings on Bible translations, and I am amazed that some of you are so concerned to support KJV as THE translation, and to discuss about inspired or non-inspired translations.
There is simply no such thing as "inspired translation". Translations are good or not so good, and be sure that all of them are imperfect. We SDAs can be satisfied with this, because we don't believe in a verbal inspiration of the Bible. Thus we allow not only the translators and scribes to err, but
also the inspired authors themselves. Don't we ?
I teach Biblical Languages, Hermeneutic and Exegesis in a SDA Theological Seminary overseas. For many years I compared translations, Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, I also have read studies authored by others, and I can tell you that there is no basis to cling to THAT translation.
In my country (Romania), our people avoid the Orthodox (majority) Bible translation and stick to the Evangelical Cornilescu Bible. I am convinced that their main reason is that they are familiar with the language of Cornilescu Bible (which is indeed, more modern). Another reason is that the Orthodox Bible adds Apocripha in the OT (because its text is translated from the Septuagint, which Orthodox think it's THE inspired Old Testament), and because in the New Testament there are some verses where Orthodox translated "priests" instead of "elders".
But if you search for other references (for example in Daniel etc., you discover the Orthodox Bible aa a better translation...
Now I am an active member of the Romanian Interconfessional Bible Translation, and I am acquainted with leaders of the international forum (UBS), and with their translation policy. I can testify that it is now conspiragy against the Truth. But, anyway, doctrinal criteria (even SDA doctrines) are anot accepted understandably in translation.
All these people who serve in the Bible translation, at local level or at UBS aren't perfect. They smoke, they drink, maybe some of them have a wordly life. Some of them are staunch fundamentalists (Evangelical or Orthodox), and some are quite liberal (e.g. thinking that Daniel is written late in the second century BC). However, they are honest people, trying to do their best professional and being more than respectful with a SDA scholar: they care what I would say, when we meet for translation.
I think it's better to have 7 sinners unite and translate a Bible, than just one righteous man. This is not so much an "inspired" work, but it is professional. I had a surgery at my left eye, and the surgeon, a renegated Jew, was cursing, using God's name during that operation. However, his surgery succeded well, because he was a good professionist.
Each human work is imperfect, so is the Bible authoring, copying, editing, and translation. Its interpretation is also imperfect. God make us responsible for what we could do, not for what is beyond our control. God gave in the Church different gifts, and I don't think that will ever be a time when we have the perfect translation, or when all the Church will read the Bible in Hebrew and Greek. If you trust the KJV translators' motivation or skill, though you cannot check it out, please trust also the contemporary gifts in the Church, even they aren't supernatural. Or, if not, please learn Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, textual criticism and so on...
Excuse my poor English. I love you, anyway.
------------------
Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (NIV 2 Corinthians 4:2)
[This message has been edited by Florin Lăiu (edited 03-05-2003).]
[This message has been edited by Florin Lăiu (edited 03-05-2003).]