tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post1503038389015849347..comments2023-10-20T07:14:40.841-03:00Comments on Ecumenicity: Adding To Sola Scriptura For ClarityTom B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/08014927666068877364noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post-33380136456875574582007-08-24T12:50:00.000-03:002007-08-24T12:50:00.000-03:00Oh no, I agree with you all around. It's a very r...Oh no, I agree with you all around. It's a very readable translation, but the addition of a new word because it was necessary (and absent originally) is not to be excused, and (for bonus fare) inconsistent with sola scriptura to the max.<BR/><BR/>I can read above a 6th-grade level too, but the NIV team may have not used words above that level. I'm not sure. A 6th-grade level is probably more advanced than or at least equal with all major U.S. newspapers.Tom B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08014927666068877364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post-6094810181265802132007-08-24T11:23:00.000-03:002007-08-24T11:23:00.000-03:00Thos,That is what troubles me. Not the translatio...Thos,<BR/><BR/>That is what troubles me. Not the translation itself, the addition of a word that distorts the meaning of the text. This has theological ramifications. Sacred Scripture may not be the only infallible authority in the Church, but it is an authority nevertheless. This distortion damages Scriptural integrity especially in regards to Tradition and the Apostles' Creed.<BR/><BR/>I'm not attacking the NIV itself. I have occasionally referred to it once or twice since my conversion to compare and contrast with the version I use. Where I object is when words are added or taken away where they do not serve to better explain the Greek sense. When words are added "because we decided we liked it better" is when it becomes offensive to me.<BR/><BR/>I agree with Amy that this is another reason why a Magisterium and Sacred Tradition is important, but I disagree that the NIV was written for sixth graders. I believe that my family members can read above a sixth grade level.<BR/><BR/>I hope you don't think that my beef is with the tranlation itself.Skyrim Geekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04809088855172879580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post-64393103996799092392007-08-24T09:30:00.000-03:002007-08-24T09:30:00.000-03:00Let me add that the "even to" in 1 Peter 4:6 almos...Let me add that the "even to" in 1 Peter 4:6 almost seems silly if the verse is only discussing preaching the Word to people who were alive.<BR/><BR/>I'm a lifetime NIV user. I have a (now elderly) relative (theologian) that co-wrote the Study Bible notes for one of the N.T. books. Another close relative proofread portions. I was raised in the Christian Reformed Church, which sponsored this translation, and is very proud of it. This was an unpleasant criticism for me to make.<BR/><BR/>The NIV was not meant to be simplistic like the TNIV (Today's NIV), which says Mary was "pregnant", in case "with child" is too confusing for people of our simple minds. (After all, if scripture is meant to be perspicuous (a part of sola scriptura, right?), why not help it out with a translation?) The NIV claims to be accurate without sounding archain - it is a "dynamic equivalency" translation, so readability was preferred to a literal translation. But adding a word not in the Greek to change the meaning of a verse so it doesn't 'conflict' with another verse in Hebrews...Tom B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08014927666068877364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post-39876058260800010092007-08-24T01:37:00.000-03:002007-08-24T01:37:00.000-03:00Well, the NIV was supposed to be a very simplistic...Well, the NIV was supposed to be a very simplistic translation. I think it was translated for a 6th grade reading level (I'm serious, I'm not being facetious). <BR/><BR/>But no translation of SS will be perfect since they are all translations, not originals. It's why Jesus left Apostles to carry on His teachings, and didn't write anything down Himself :)Amyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03828003230553672867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post-48228139127652383572007-08-24T00:51:00.000-03:002007-08-24T00:51:00.000-03:00As you well point out, this verse is part of the w...As you well point out, this verse is part of the whole of St. Peter's letter. By erroneously adding the word "now", the commentators actually managed to eliminate one of the truths of the Apostles Creed in Sacred Scripture. Sacred Scripture is sacred. It is delicate and Holy. Each word is given to us by God. How can we determine what must be added? This is why I have a hard time debating Scripture.<BR/><BR/>The pain. It actually hurts to see this. Especially knowing that most of my family members use the NIV.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for pointing this out. It's good to know.Skyrim Geekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04809088855172879580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8505754445949711172.post-91314518600588529062007-08-24T00:42:00.000-03:002007-08-24T00:42:00.000-03:00Oh! The pain! Oh, my, how that changes the entir...Oh! The pain! Oh, my, how that changes the entire theological meaning of the text. One additional word, such distortion. Oh, it hurts!Skyrim Geekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04809088855172879580noreply@blogger.com