How do theists justify the translations of the scriptures?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

[John 6IX Breezy]

The Bible, or any other holy book, is a translation of scriptures written thousands of years ago, and even in different tongues.

How can theists confirm these translations are 100%, or even somewhat, accurate?

One would think that if God wants to deliver such an important message, it would be translation and time proof. But I am sure that the Bible is different even in modern bibles of different languages, and even of the same language.

Generally speaking, Christians look up several translation when they want to get the overall meaning of a verse, and lookup the original languages using lexicons and other sources when they want the specific meaning of a word. I went to a Christian school for a bit and took a semester of Greek as one of their electives.

Most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and I'm sure Jewish people can verify the translations since the Old Testament is pretty much theirs to begin with. The New Testament is Ancient Greek, probably similar to Platonic writings, so it's not too difficult to get your hands on the original languages and some dictionaries.

I don't think such a level of analysis is needed, in fact I'm of the opinion that the best way to read the bible is to hear it spoken, but if you desire to go that deep the option is always available.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Generally speaking, Christians look up several translation when they want to get the overall meaning of a verse, and lookup the original languages using lexicons and other sources when they want the specific meaning of a word.

Generally speaking, Christians do nothing of the kind.

Boru

[John 6IX Breezy]

[Drich]

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

never said there where 25,000 copies from the first century. I said this message has been preserved for over two thousand years. out of that preservation during that time period we have over 25,000 hand written copies of text that all tell the same message.

What you actually said was:

the fact that there are over 25,000 copies of the bible hand written and preserved over 2000 years

This is patently untrue.  There is, in fact, NO copy of the Bible that has been preserved for over 2000 years.  The oldest copy of the New Testament is the Codex Sinaiticus, which was most likely written around the middle of the 4th century.

I'll try again, since you appear to have missed it.  A 'copy' is not the same as a 'manuscript'.  If I write out all the words of  'Moby Dick' by hand, that's a copy AND a manuscript.  If I write 'Call me Ismael' and nothing else, that's not a copy, but it's still a manuscript. Prior to Codex Sinaiticus, what we have are manuscripts in fragment form, some more substantial than others.  But none of these are 'copies of the bible'.

I'll happily grant that the New Testament has over 25 000 extant manuscripts. Big deal.

what do you think is happening when we go to the greek texts?

I think that I admire the scholarship and the effort by Christians who do that, but I'm unconvinced that this is something that Christians 'generally' do.  Until it is demonstrated otherwise, I'm going to hold to the notion that the great majority of Christians don't engage in any serious scholarship regarding scripture, they simply 'eat what is set before them'.


Boru

[Drich]

[John 6IX Breezy]

I think that I admire the scholarship and the effort by Christians who do that, but I'm unconvinced that this is something that Christians 'generally' do.  Until it is demonstrated otherwise, I'm going to hold to the notion that the great majority of Christians don't engage in any serious scholarship regarding scripture, they simply 'eat what is set before them'.

Boru

Hmm I don't know whether to agree or disagree. I can agree that there are many people, that identify as Christians, but the closest they come to practicing Christianity is having a prayer during a Thanksgiving meal.

But I also disagree because I grew up with a very traditional protestant mentality of "bring your bible to church to test if what the pastor is saying is true." There's nothing layfolk love more than going home after church, having potluck, and complaining about what the pastor said wrong and how the church leadership isn't what it used to be.

That tradition might not exist within Catholicism however.

[Fake Messiah]

Generally speaking, Christians look up several translation when they want to get the overall meaning of a verse, and lookup the original languages using lexicons and other sources when they want the specific meaning of a word. I went to a Christian school for a bit and took a semester of Greek as one of their electives.

Imagine you're reading Bible supposedly translated by experts and you still need a dictionary because you're a bigger expert.

Like I said earlier that scholars don't even agree on how verses should be translated. You could be the world's greatest Greek or Hebrew scholar and still have experts dispute your interpretations.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I think that I admire the scholarship and the effort by Christians who do that, but I'm unconvinced that this is something that Christians 'generally' do.  Until it is demonstrated otherwise, I'm going to hold to the notion that the great majority of Christians don't engage in any serious scholarship regarding scripture, they simply 'eat what is set before them'.

Boru

Hmm I don't know whether to agree or disagree. I can agree that there are many people, that identify as Christians, but the closest they come to practicing Christianity is having a prayer during a Thanksgiving meal.

But I also disagree because I grew up with a very traditional protestant mentality of "bring your bible to church to test if what the pastor is saying is true." There's nothing layfolk love more than going home after church, having potluck, and complaining about what the pastor said wrong and how the church leadership isn't what it used to be.

That tradition might not exist within Catholicism however.

I'll give you an example of what I'm getting at.  A lot of Christians are fond of quoting John 3:16.  It's a very popular verse and (I have to assume) a very comforting one.  But I strongly doubt that many of the Christians who throw this around have looked up the Greek for 'loved', 'begotten', 'perish', 'eternal' and so on.  But good on them if they do.  The verse on the face of it makes them feel good, it makes them feel loved, it gives them hope for a life beyond this one.  They really don't have a reason to dig deeper.

Boru