Academic Inerrancy, Practical Errancy: Does Inerrancy Matter in Practice?

[TB2]

Thanks for all the work.
None of which is substantive.

I would say it's valuable to have Mounce's firsthand perspective on these things as a scholar of NT koine Greek, and one who has served on translation committees for the NIV & ESV. As he notes elsewhere in the book, "every translator knows" that translation is "not word for word, but thought for thought." It's all about communicating the meaning of a given passage, which requires interpretation as to the meaning of a given text so one knows how best to convey that in modern terms. It is never perfect. But like he says, too, it doesn't keep the gospel message from being conveyed.

 

[Eleanor]

I would say it's valuable to have Mounce's firsthand perspective on these things as a scholar of NT koine Greek, and one who has served on translation committees for the NIV & ESV. As he notes elsewhere in the book, "every translator knows" that translation is "not word for word, but thought for thought." It's all about communicating the meaning of a given passage, which requires interpretation as to the meaning of a given text so one knows how best to convey that in modern terms. It is never perfect. But like he says, too, it doesn't keep the gospel message from being conveyed.

Many accurate translations without a dime's worth of difference between them.

 

[TB2]

Many accurate translations without a dime's worth of difference between them.

Many translations follow similar translation philosophies. Are there pretty accurate translations? Sure. Perfectly accurate translations? No.

My experience is that certain translations are more accurate for specific passages but not for others. And that no, one single translation has it all/is accurate through and through.

Like with Day 2 of the Creation week, the KJV gives the sense of the Latin/Greek/Hebrew with "firmament" (that which is firm). And I would say the NRSV & NIV are up there with "dome" and "vault." The ESVs "expanse" is too ambiguous and top easily misunderstood. And the NLT's (if memory serves) "space" is probably the worst and way off. But then the translations that do well to pretty well here are inaccurate for other passages.

 

[Eleanor]

Many translations follow similar translation philosophies. Are there pretty accurate translations? Sure. Perfectly accurate translations? No.

My experience is that certain translations are more accurate for specific passages but not for others. And that no, one single translation has it all/is accurate through and through.

Like with Day 2 of the Creation week, the KJV gives the sense of the Latin/Greek/Hebrew with "firmament" (that which is firm). And I would say the NASB & NIV are up there with "dome" and "vault." The ESVs "expanse" is too ambiguous and top easily misunderstood. And the NLT's (if memory serves) "space" is probably the worst and way off. But then the translations that do well to pretty well here are inaccurate for other passages.

None of which are substantive.

 

[TB2]

None of which are substantive.

Well again, my point is not whether we have an accurate translation but a perfectly inerrant one. None of us do.

 

[Eleanor]

Well again, my point is not whether we have an accurate translation but a perfectly inerrant one. None of us do.

The point is not substantive.

 

[TB2]

The point is not substantive.

Maybe not to you, but it is for those who misunderstand the doctrine of inerrancy to extend to manuscript copies and translations.

 

[Eleanor]

Maybe not to you, but it is for those who misunderstand the doctrine of inerrancy to extend to manuscript copies and translations.

Agreed.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

1. The Doctrine of Inerrancy states that only the original autographs are inspired and inerrant.

Yup - it's the popular "Work-around" for the simple fact that there are ERRORS of FACT in the Bible. And since THERE ARE NO "Original Autographs", nobody can prove you wrong!!!!

Is the doctrine merely academic?

Pretty much. "Doctrine" saves NOBODY, Direct interaction between the Holy Spirit and individuals, in the form of "CONVICTION OF SIN" is what gets 'er done.

 

[EarlyActs]

Yup - it's the popular "Work-around" for the simple fact that there are ERRORS of FACT in the Bible. And since THERE ARE NO "Original Autographs", nobody can prove you wrong!!!!

Pretty much. "Doctrine" saves NOBODY, Direct interaction between the Holy Spirit and individuals, in the form of "CONVICTION OF SIN" is what gets 'er done.

When you need to make decisions about adultery or Judaizing, you want to know that you are essentially close to the apostles teaching.