Does the translation of the Bible to our language reflects it's original meaning?

[Hellblazer 2.1]

yes, true.

but the scribes that i knew like Ezra (OT), Nehemiah and Judas Maccabeus (NT), were believed to have copied word for word the manuscrips, they even counted all the lines so that they will not miss and God enlighten them when they copied it...

we're talking about later translations (decades or hundreds of years after their supposed writing) which were later copied and then copied some more. so, if the error occurred during the primary translations, chances are, the copies are corrupted already. there's another scenario that was proven. during copying, the texts were edited/manipulated either intentionally or unintentionally. now, those copies were also copied so the errors were multiplying exponentially. that's why the bible is not to be taken literally as the perfect word of God. God didn't write it, but men did.

[donna_belle]

if you really want to know then we should exert extra effort to refer it to older version or refer to greek and hebrew interlinear and there you will know the exact or the right term or word to be used.

Peace!

nice one brother

[The_Child]

@ spike

translation is interpretation, you cant translate without interpreting something.

@ Hell

Who changed the Bible and why? Bart Ehrman’s startling answers | Dangerous Intersection


@ the topic

We are preoccupied with an inherent meaning of the bible, what if the meaning is not inherent in the object? what if the meaning lies in the relationship of the reader and the object being read, and not just in either poles?

[NASYO]

sample ha..

kung naay pulong "dukot" sa bibliya, libog kaayo ug translate ana sa ubang pulong..

[Ger]

sample ha..

kung naay pulong "dukot" sa bibliya, libog kaayo ug translate ana sa ubang pulong..

walay sense imo gi-sulti brother... i translate na nimo kung giunsa gigamit sa ilang pulong... ang tinuod cguro naay taw nga motranslate sa intention nga pag-guba sama sa uban dha.... hehehe

[NapoleonBlownapart]

I'm not familiar what language or writing does the original Scripture has... but it was translated to different languages already... and we know that most of the time, translation from one language to another should be so precise to hold it's original and true meaning...

So, to all of you out there, i would like to know your opinion...

Thank you...

not all translations.. Moffat and Lamsa translations are "questionable".

[NapoleonBlownapart]

para nako, naa jud to error. mga 99.9 percent tali ang error sa pagkatranslate.

mura pud gani ug 499.999 percent jud nga sayop ang interpretation.

mura lang ha.

hehehe.. ngano nakaingon man ka Nasyo? have you read the Greek and Hebrew texts nga gibasihan sa mga translators?

[kebotDiNaMute]

If I may... what if some of those that don't believe in God - like the atheists, buddhists, are they considered pawns of satan? I agree about the choices... but bringing them out to place that they are not accepted in a society of religion or any civilized society for that matter is somewhat irrational. No pun intended, btw.

All is well.

If I may... what if some of those that don't believe in God - like the atheists, buddhists, are they considered pawns of satan
--- omg. What were you thinking.
--- most athiest of the "SO-SO" athiest on this forums are against Bible, and they will do anything to discredit it... the act itself is called evil doing. If you dont bother or care at all dogma said no religion will save you. So dont make a statement that just because you are outside the circle does not mean you are pwn of satan. Simple raman unta sis... JUST DON'T DO SATANIC ACT AND EVIL DOINGS. I wonder why these things disturbed you...(not unless...) hmmm... ka alegre

[kebotDiNaMute]

para nako, naa jud to error. mga 99.9 percent tali ang error sa pagkatranslate.

mura pud gani ug 499.999 percent jud nga sayop ang interpretation.

mura lang ha.

hahaha, diin ka ani na numero nasyo? hahaha! unsa ni lotto combination... hahaha! if sak2 ang pangisip nasyo 100 % error murag apil pa speling sayop... hahaha! pero 499%, kani murag gidungag sa sayop ang nag analyse.. hahah! gamay nalang kuwang... naa pay "mura lang ha".

hala pa check up na ngad2...

remember: maraming na dadala sa maling akala... hahaha!

[NapoleonBlownapart]

taasa ani nyor oi.. kani lang sa ako komentan..

(Page 7). At Princeton, Ehrman learned that mistakes had been made in the copying of the New Testament over the centuries. Upon realizing this, “the floodgates opened.” In Mark 4, for example, Jesus allegedly stated that the mustard seed is “the smallest of all seeds on the earth.” Ehrman knew that this simply was not true. The more he studied the early manuscripts, the more he realized that the Bible was full of contradictions. For instance, Mark writes that Jesus was crucified the day after the Passover meal (Mark 14:12; 15:25) while John says Jesus died the day before the Passover meal (John 19:14).

no contradiction at all.. If you study the texts yourself you will see that both books tell us that Jesus died the day before the Sabbath..