Bill Mounce: Can We Trust Bible Translations?

I can translate the ancient Greek word for word, no problem. I have been learning modern Greek for many years and can speak it well. Translating the ancient Greek bible, its something I like to do. It gives you a first hand feel on how it was written.

I must say I do like your work. Keep posting.

this dude is dishonest. that's all that needs to be said.

he is attempting to side step the obvious issues with new translations and not mentioning that there are different manuscripts first off. and who is deciding the "philosophy" of translating. who's philosophy are they going to. God speaks once, Yay twice. he has his living word and written word which Jesus goes to throughout scripture.

he is speaking to the simple act of taking linguistic knowledge and applying. this is the word of God, not some random historical document.

Not everyone is so gifted with language skills that they can read different translations. I do agree that the meaning is the most important thing. And so... the meaning should, logically, be impossible to interpret in a wrong way. Because God would have made shure that everyone who translates his words is doing so without the ability to change or distort it in any way. The meaning/information would always remain the same. Yet there are clear difference. For example... Im swedish. Yup, many americans thinks we are sinful and sexually "liberated". Well, actually, the swedish translation of NT doesnt say that sex before marriage is a sin. But some NT in other languages do. How is this possible?

Most newer translations are anti christ. They attempt to denounce Jesus Christ! KJV is the best, this is coming from a person who used the most popular but then the Lord convicted me.

How do people feel about the Revised Standard Version? A friend gave me one a few weeks ago. I switched from King James to the English Standard Version a few years ago, and have been happy with it. But I want to be open to others. Recently I bought a New American Standard Bible, but I haven't had the chance to start it.

King James? I got tired of all the Elizabethan language. Plus new manuscripts have been found since 1611. Time to update!

none of you own the 1611 KJV bible because then you would've known that the 1611 KJV had freemasonry and kabbalistic imagery. Ridiculous

I have spoken the same English language for over 30 years of my life. I haven’t had to learn a modern way of speaking English, so why do people feel the need to have more of a variety of English Bibles and to publish a new one every several years? It just makes no sense to me. The constant change is hard enough for the followers of Jesus Christ to try to understand, it becomes much more confusing for unbelievers to understand. Furthermore, with the constant change of God’s Word, it starts to lose its credibility and shows the world that we don’t really have an accurate translation of scripture. When will this stop?

You can only trust the KJV.

These guys make BANK every time they publish a new fake version.

It astonishes me that this conversation never brings up the replacement of "Lucifer" (and other overt references) with words and phrases that are far less indicative of the presence of the enemy in that verse or verses. This should be covered in any interview snippet like this.

Just cringe worthy to read the ignorance of the King James Only freaks in the comments....these heretical people make Christians sound so ignorant and stupid..

Honestly, I think Young's Literal Bible is the best bible translation in English, if you want what's actually in the Greek and Hebrew. The problem with the KJV, NIV, ESV, NASB, RSV, and others, is they are forcing doctrines upon you. In other words, these linguists are good at language but are typically lousy theologians. Really bad actually.

Can someone tell me why all translations except KJV and NKJV leaves out the obvious trinity in 1 John 5:7? This to me is a little more than "word variations"

NIV translation team must be like, "How do we twist this to make it sound more Reformed?"

I do not trust the ESV on any sex/gender related text, simply because they admit they are masculinist in their translation philosophy. I am grateful for the work of translators, but I think one always needs to reserve the ability to translate some specific texts for themselves based on one's own studies.

Isagogics + exegesis = understanding

That's fascinating! Love that "holy kiss" example. My first time watching the Seven Minute Seminary and I can't wait for more!

I'll take words every time. Stay with formal equivalence

Translations; Do they really help in a Bible study group? By the time everyone has said "my translation says this" time is up and everyone is gone. "Holy Kiss" everybody knows is about the intention of the heart which is known and discerned by God.

How will I know that I am interpreting the Greek verse correctly if there are professional people doing it for me, even professional people have different interpretations. In other words, how will I know if my interpretation is correct?

One of these days, I’d like to buy Dr Bill a cup of coffee (or tea), & thank him for what he has taught me (via a distance). “All scripture is the Holy Spirits working ground”, so I use a broad range of translations, as well as diving into the Greek. As a Reformer we must always remember that since Scripture is the Holy Spirits venue, then we believe in the “perspicuity” of scripture (from the olde KJV to the NLT). If we ever elevate simply one translation as being the ‘right one’ above all others, than we have reduced that bible into a Magic Book. Thank you Dr Bill.

How can two different versions of the same book have a different translation philosophy? I feel like this is going to muddle the message that God originally intended.

Why do we need a new translation. The 400 year old KJV is Good enough for me.

Why does one have to translate the phrase "a holy kiss"?

Why should some words in king james version is not found in Hebrew Jewish bible?

The niv is the worst translation so many scripture taken out I threw it in the trash better read the book of revelations again.the kjv version 1611 the only true translation..goodby.

Thanks Dr. Mounce! I still have an old copy of "Basics of Biblical Greek". God Bless!

Hi Dr. Mounce are you still doing videos?
I have a question on some problems i found in the NIV, NASB, RSV, ASV...
and more. Its the word Grievous vs Prosper in ps 10: 4-6
These 2 words are total opposite of one another. In the other versions it would mean if i didnt seek God and he is not in my thoughts my ways would prosper or my life would be firm.

This was an excellent insiders view, and overlay, of Bible translation and its inhetent shortcomings, etc.

I so greatly appreciate the concise Seedbed videos. I'm saddened when I see so few take advantage.

Two adjuncts come to mind when I succinctly want to add to this translation understanding. Firstly, is the all-encompassing lesson attempted by God in John 2:23-25. God certainly knew what He was doing when he had the Greek manifest in the way it does, in the time and place it did. Ditto English. God does not commit Himself more than he does. He would idealistically "want" to in a perfect world, which we are not. We as hubristically inclined mortals cannot handle any more preciseness than what we are given. Prov. 6:16-17a. Sadly so.

Secondly, is our hearts' problem. The writers of the NT were not given such prohetic dictation until, what, 20, 30 and 40 years and more after the Ascension. Why? It takes decades to entirely purify the heart. It takes the not so heavy Hand of God time and time again His dragging someone out to the bright Light of him revealing remaining impure motives of someone's heart; ripping out those idols, replacing them with the fullness of Fruits, Wisdom, etc.

I love best the old Douay-Rheims Bible translation of, "The husbandman who labors must first be partaker of the fruits," or something like that. The 2nd point here being, if a translator has not first had their heart entirely sanctified and it replaced with the fully ripe Fruits of Love, Meekness, etc., they will twist the Word to self-justify their remaining fig leaves which hide impure motives from their own selves. Jer. 17:9.

So, since translators very seldom equal the first apostles including Luke in purity of heart and presumably apprehension of entire entire (sic) sanctification via the Fruits of the S(s)pitit....

I love J B Phillips original 1962 version of Romans 6.2, which uses the expression "What a ghastly thought!" - sadly changed to "What a terrible thought!" in the 1971 revision.

I believed that we can trust the well-accepted translations… until I was recommended a book by Wayne Grudem. I looked into him and saw that he is on the ESV translation team and the editor of the ESV study Bible. (Pretty good references, right?) And he also has written a handful of articles claiming that the only moral choice in a specific US election is voting for a specific candidate; his case is made by interleaving Bible verses with invective. It’s the most unchristian use of the Biblical text I’ve seen in a long time.
He is probably very well-versed in the ancient languages, but when someone like this remains on the translation team, it becomes clear that these teams have agendas far different than presenting an accurate, modern reading of the Bible. It truly saddens me.

Dr. MOUNCE was tge only professsor in 3 years whose pedagogy was so unclear that many of us dropped his class and took it from someone else after he quit his job because he was having difficulty getting along with other faculty. He is unrelateble.

NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRITURES is the most accurate Bible on this planet earth and they are free.

Bible is the Bible it's not up to us to make it understandable and fit our culture because it wasn't written in our culture, it's up to us to understand it and interpret it according to it's nature and the utterance of the holy spirit