BCSpace Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 That’s right: Muslim-friendly Bibles.Included in the controversial development is the removal of any references to God as “Father,” to Jesus as the “Son” or “the Son of God.” One example of such a change can be seen in an Arabic version of the Gospel of Matthew produced and promoted by Frontiers and SIL. It changes Matthew 28:19 from this:“baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”to this:“cleanse them by water in the name of Allah, his Messiah and his Holy Spirit.”A large number of such Muslim-sensitive translations already are published and well-circulated in several Muslim-majority nations such as Bangladesh, Indonesia and Malaysia.According to Joshua Lingel of i2 Ministries “Even more dramatic a change is the Arabic and Bangla (Bangladesh) translations. In Arabic, Bible translations err by translating ‘Father’ as ‘Lord.’ ‘Guardian.’ ‘Most High’ and ‘God.” In Bangla, ‘Son of God’ is mistranslated ‘Messiah of God’ consistent with the Quran’s Isa al-Masih (Jesus the Messiah), which references the merely human Jesus.”......................While the organizations that are promoting these translations are adamant that replacing such terms as Father with Lord or Master best conveys the inspired meaning of the text, many of the indigenous Christian leaders from the countries where these translations are being promoted are broadly rejecting the translations.The indigenous believers see the introduction of these American-made translations with which they so strongly disagree as a form of American cultural imperialism or colonialism.According to Turkish pastor Fikret Böcek, such new translations are, “an all-American idea with absolutely no respect for the sacredness of Scripture, or even of the growing Turkish church.”According to the testimony of one leader from a church in Bangladesh, one of the most problematic aspects of this development is that it gives fuel to the often-heard Muslim claim that Christians are liars who change their Bibles to deceive Muslims. Once a Bible translation is well established within any country, the introduction of such radically different translations reinforces the Muslim charge and undermines trust in the Christian community.http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/new-bible-yanks-father-jesus-as-son-of-god/ Link to comment
Calm Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 The indigenous believers see the introduction of these American-made translations with which they so strongly disagree as a form of American cultural imperialism or colonialism.Interesting perception. The translators are probably thinking they are being sensitive to the targeted community. II think this is a prime example of how those who are trying to be helpful end up screwing things up because they don't take enough time to get to really know the people they are trying to help. Link to comment
thesometimesaint Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 BCSpace:Allah is just the Arabic name for God. Even Christians in Arabic speaking countries use the term Allah. Link to comment
Calm Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 "God" to "Allah" wasn't one of the allegedly inappropriate changes being discussed in the above quote, it was "Father" to "Allah". Link to comment
thesometimesaint Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 calmoriah:Wheather addressing God as Allah, The Father, Yahwey, the Great Spirit, or more idioms than I know about they are all talking about the same person. Link to comment
sethpayne Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 If this helps more Muslims read the New Testament then great. I see no problem here.Frankly, a "Christianized" Koran would be interesting to read (although I have no idea what such a Koran would actually be). Well, at least a Koran with extensive footnotes to help Christians understand the historical context etc.... Link to comment
BCSpace Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 Wheather addressing God as Allah, The Father, Yahwey, the Great Spirit, or more idioms than I know about they are all talking about the same person.This is most assuredly not true given all the different properties ascribed to them; physical, behavioral, and theological etc. But it sounds nice (and appeasing) and yes, someone in the BoM did it. I don't take that as a sign we should be doing it because I think the context in the BoM is different. Alma is building a foundation in nonreligious sand whereas we are trying to (erroneously) say "we are just like you". Link to comment
The Nehor Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 If this helps more Muslims read the New Testament then great. I see no problem here.Frankly, a "Christianized" Koran would be interesting to read (although I have no idea what such a Koran would actually be). Well, at least a Koran with extensive footnotes to help Christians understand the historical context etc...."There are only three Gods though One in substance and Muhammed is not his/their messenger in the commonly accepted sense he is believed to be."Yeah....don't see it going over that well. Link to comment
David T Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Hey, if we can have a revised version of the Bible (JST) to bring it more in line theologically with newer Revelation, I don't think we have any room to talk in them having their own version 'corrected' in light of their own Revelation, which also states that the previous scriptures have been corrupted in transmission.Heck, even most of our Old Testament history books are in a revised state meant to bring history and theology in line with post-exilic Prophets and their understanding. It's sort of a prophetic tradition to re-contextualize and re-present the earlier texts to make them more relevant to the present generation. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Hey, if we can have a revised version of the Bible (JST) to bring it more in line theologically with newer Revelation, I don't think we have any room to talk in them having their own version 'corrected' in light of their own Revelation, which also states that the previous scriptures have been corrupted in transmission.Heck, even most of our Old Testament history books are in a revised state meant to bring history and theology in line with post-exilic Prophets and their understanding. It's sort of a prophetic tradition to re-contextualize and re-present the earlier texts to make them more relevant to the present generation.Yes but one of the fundamental principles of most Islamic groups is that while earlier scriptures (Bible) are corrupted the Koran is perfect. There is also no precedent in Islam for altering the Koran. There was was some precedent for it in Christianity of course but Joseph Smith was still accused of blaspheming. Link to comment
BCSpace Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 Hey, if we can have a revised version of the Bible (JST) to bring it more in line theologically with newer RevelationIs that the stated reason why there is a JST? Is that why the LDS CHurch uses the JST excerpts? Link to comment
Anijen Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Being politically correct is that a reason to mistranslate scripture, i.e. son to messiah?I am concerned about changing text to please anyone.Next thing we know they'll be wanting to change Mark Twain's words Link to comment
thesometimesaint Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 BCspace:I don't have the Gift of Tongues, except to the point I know Social Work jargon. I speak only English. God in French comes out as Dieu. But I can assure you that to French speaking Christians, and Muslims it is the same God as the English speakers. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.