Paul was a very intelligent man and one that could kill people over their religion is certainly not going to be a mild-mannered person - although I'm sure he changed after knowing Jesus.
No riots today.
Seems to me that everyone feels they have the right and authority to just put any definition on the Christian RELIGION judging by hte replies I got on my thread asking if a person could be considered a Christian and not believe in the Trinity.
Many said yes....thus describing the Christian religion differently than it has been throughout history.
As to translation...I know it's difficult since I speak more than one language and face this all the time.
Translators don't just know the two languages at hand...they actually have to know how to translate them...totally differnet. For instance, I can translate Italian to English but cannot properly translate English to Italian. I say PROPERLY...I can translate it.
This is the problem those translating the bible had/have. Although there is much more information today -hermeneutics.
I'm going to post the Greek Lexicon here for anyone that is interested is understanding how difficult it is.
Just to clarify...you and I do agree as to the topic at hand.
View attachment 79626
Speaking directly to your point on translating....
There's something else that you need to consider. Politics and more specifically Christian politics. (It exists)
There exists many theologies among various denominations that, while not critical for salvation, are defended vigorously and treated as if they were.
So when a "more accurate" translation comes about with all available knowledge at that time considering the translation...it can end up treated as if it was Satan's bible instead of God's.
Tyndale and king Henry 8th found themselves at odds due to a disagreement over local control over churches versus Central control over all churches. Tyndale held that scriptures do not weigh in on the subject so Henry had him killed as a traitor to the realm even though Miles Coverdale used Tyndale's translation for the Great Bible.
And when Henry sought a divorce they used a false charge of adultery to execute his wife so he could marry another.
Then, as the centuries passed, Tyndale's translation went through many revisions BUT the translators used tradition to keep certain passages deliberately vague (Matthew 19 & Carpentry as Jesus's occupation) or continuous with previous translations so the new translation would sell.
None of the early printing press operators became wealthy printing Bibles. In fact just the opposite. They all went broke printing Bibles. Thomas Nelson and Cokesbury are the only two publishers who have actually made money printing Bibles. The Translators? Uhhh....most died impoverished too. None of them were paid appropriately for their work and usually had to rely upon patrons for food and housing.
(Which added to the pressures)
Then the publication of subsidized English bibles by those hiding in Geneva Switzerland of the Geneva Bible ensured the engineered obfuscations and traditional mistranslations remained. (As well as the "glosses" which explained the scriptures with a decidedly Calvinistic bent)
The NIV translation of the 60's sought to begin the long and arduous process of removing these problems from modern translations with footnotes explaining the more accurate translation. The NASB followed suit. Both were heralded as Bibles translated by complete heathen sinners with nefarious intentions of corrupting good Christians despite the publication of one of the most sound expositional commentaries to date. (Discusses the language and grammar of scriptures and word choices used) However the expositional commentary is usually left unused today ....and Zondervan has mostly abandoned it by leaving it without updates or rewrites. (Which considering their owners is a good thing)
Today, it's becoming an even bigger mess of outright misinformation, malinformation and hidden information. The "media world" has created haystacks of Chrome pins to hide the silver one in its midst.
Vetting resources with historical narrative is now a necessary skill. A researcher who did several papers funded by one group would do another set on the same subjects when the research resulted in bruising one of their cherished theologies. (It's much worse than you would think....I'll be more than happy to share in a PM)
Of course the slanted research would get broadly published and the more accurate buried by lack of resources needed to promote it. And then after the researchers death....accurate is erased and bent is published even moreso as if he said only this all along.
Currently Big Denominations are trying to hold onto an ever shrinking loyalty. (Everyone smells rats) Most Bible Translations are translated for specific denominations. (NIV never was originally...the recent updated translations are NOT made for accuracy despite the claims....they are made for broader acceptance)
ESV-CE is the Catholic while the ESV is usually Methodists and some Calvinists.
Episcopalians love the KJV as they are Church of England and desire the most liberal divorce requirements.
There's a whole chart of who uses which translation....
Which is why I like a Messianic Jewish translation out of South Africa. Yes it openly admits its biases....but having a Jewish bent for Old and New Testaments when translating isn't such a bad thing. My friends at church roll their eyes at it but don't argue about it. Most don't know enough to do so and they know that I do have a defense for what I believe.
