Should bible translation notes be concealed from the public?
I found it really interesting to just have a peek at some of the arguments that came before Parliament during the translation work of the King James version of the bible. I thought it was a good thing to be open and that this allows future translators to consider valuable points which may have been raised in the past. Due to semantic narrowing and broadening of words over time, I think it is essential that the bible is regularly revised personally so that the original meaning is kept in tact. Also any former mistakes can be reconsidered and even amended if necessary.
Also, should the translators' names be kept secret? All of them must have been sinners, as none are Jesus Christ himself, so what is there to hide?
- Anonymous9 years agoFavorite Answer
1) Should bible translation notes be concealed from the public?
No. The King James Version translators considered (certain, many) translators' notes to be a **necessary** addition to their Bible, and such notes were included in the first edition and in many subsequent editions. It is a shame that so many KJV editions today omit those notes.
Very many English Bibles include the most essential (for reader understanding) translators' notes. The NET Bible seems to have the most exhaustive set of translators' notes, though I do not know if they are available in print editions. The NRSV has very many translators' notes, but they are very terse. Often study Bibles include translators' notes (like the NJB-RE) that are not found in "standard" editions of the bible.
2) Due to semantic narrowing and broadening of words over time, I think it is essential that the bible is regularly revised personally so that the original meaning is kept in tact
A well-informed conclusion.
3) Also, should the translators' names be kept secret?
It is often advantageous for the publishers of Bibles to make publicly available the names and credentials of the translators (proving that only accredited experts were in charge of and responsible for the translation). Some do not do so - and naturally one wonders if the credentials of some of the translators are less than stellar.
- ?Lv 49 years ago
Many of these notes were suppressed after the Catholic church's brief flirtation with Modernism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It became very difficult to rationalise the non-historical with the spiritual.
It would be a REALLY good idea to do a proper new translation of original sources again, since certain obvious mistranslations have been kept in the Bible for doctrinal reasons for over a thousand years.
The "born of a virgin" prophesy is perhaps the most obvious. The original word in Hebrew is Alma, which means simply "young woman" and makes no claims about the chastity of the person in question. It would be pretty difficult to square that change with the doctrine of the Virgin Birth now.
- Anonymous9 years ago
The inerrant word of God from the Bible does not change over time.
- oldandtiredLv 79 years ago
Truth is the greatest enemy of any authority figure. There are three ways to define the act of taking control of another person’s life: criminal, authority, or lunatic. Personally, I can see no difference.
That is why all authorities keep secrets.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Agnostic FrontLv 69 years ago
It doesn't matter. Everyone translates them differently, why do you think there's 92803759q487520934857 religions based on that 1 book?
- NevaLv 59 years ago
I, myself, think that is a great idea. It would make great copy. Using names also for history notes.