• Announcements

    • GT

      Log in changes   08/07/2016

      With the upgrade there is no longer separate login ids and display names.  Your login ID is now your display name.
    • pawtucket

      Document Section   08/11/2016

      With the upgrade to the new server, we ran into problems with the software managing the document section.  While this is being remedied, the domain is redirected to the forums. 
DontWorryBeHappy

HERE WE GO......YET AGAIN!

94 posts in this topic

I guess my question MRAP is what do you mean by well constructed?

John S@&oenh#it said he primarily chose the ASV of 1901 as text to develop the REV. One of my concerns is peer review of the REV. What scholars were/are involved? I'm paraphrasing some here, but he said the text was changed where necessary? Who determines what's necessary? If 20-30 scholars are involved like the NRSV or NIV, and others, that's one thing. If it's 1guy who decided he wanted his own translation, that's another thing. Academic credentials do carry some weight IMO when it comes to a project like a new version of scripture. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JayDee said:

I guess my question MRAP is what do you mean by well constructed?

John S@&oenh#it said he primarily chose the ASV of 1901 as text to develop the REV. One of my concerns is peer review of the REV. What scholars were/are involved? I'm paraphrasing some here, but he said the text was changed where necessary? Who determines what's necessary? If 20-30 scholars are involved like the NRSV or NIV, and others, that's one thing. If it's 1guy who decided he wanted his own translation, that's another thing. Academic credentials do carry some weight IMO when it comes to a project like a new version of scripture. 

Excellent post.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


O.K., back to the issue of the REV itself.




What part of it does anyone find wrongly presented/translated/interpreted, etc.




I used the word "constructed" as an overall coverage of the above items in the sentence.




Still, to this date, I have not read any rebutal to the actual stuff in the REV.




Hey, I ain't defending the REV, I am seeking a conversation on any parts of it that are - debatable.




 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2016 at 6:29 PM, MRAP said:

I only met JAL once or twice so I really have no opinion on the man but am not excited by his current teachings.  So JAL is TLF but my major concern is STF since I appreciate and enjoy reading the REV version (redundant) of the Bible.  I have asked this question prior and not gotten a good answer about the REV: is it well constructed?  I have gotten opinions on folks but none on the validity of the REV itself.  Hey, I realize that any past affiliation with TWI will paint a target on a back but dang, I want opinion on the stuff in the REV - Yes, I have gotten some hyperbole about the folks involved in it but NEVER received anything regarding the REV itself.

Hey, past TWI involvement does not make a person bad, otherwise, we are all bad.

 

Perhaps it would be appropriate and better address your concerns if you would start a thread in the doctrinal forum - and focus on specific passages of the REV Bible.  

But I will say a few words about STF’s translation – and I don’t mean to step on your toes or anyone else’s who enjoy the REV Bible; just understand I am very suspicious of anything that has its roots in vpw; I know JAL has likened splitting from TWI and holding on to vpw’s doctrine to the Israelites’ exodus from Egypt and escaping with all their gold.

I don’t intend to get into a whole lot of detail on this thread about why I think anything from the mind of vpw is suspect – suffice it to say that he displayed a proclivity to distort scripture very early on in the PFAL material and class when expounding on II Peter 1: 20, 21 - he stated that it meant the word interprets itself and no one should dare to make a private interpretation:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost…. II Peter 1:20, 21 KJV

Not long after I left TWI this was one of the first screwy vpw interpretations I noticed. By simply reading it without the PFAL mind-filter engaged – I realized the passages were not prohibiting an attempt to interpret the scriptures – but merely stating the source of the scriptures – no prophecy of the scripture is OF any private interpretation – the of being genitive of origin – in other words, the scriptures did not originate from anyone’s own interpretation - but rather - as stated in the next verse it originated from the Holy Spirit inspiring men of God.

And vpw’s idea of the word “interpreting itself” is often him twisting scripture to formulate his own idea of what a particular passage means – and somehow that becomes THE only legitimate interpretation possible; and if you track the “development” of doctrine in TWI which is supposedly a research ministry – you’ll notice no one has ever contradicted or revised anything taught in PFAL – teachings by others use PFAL as a springboard or merely reinforce PFAL which is set in stone - since it is assumed by followers to be “the word”.

I think this self-assuming authority – this elitist attitude of vpw is evident on STF’s REV web page –

Our goal is to eventually have an “essentially literal” translation of the Bible that more closely represents biblical truth than any other translation currently on the market, and also one that is written in today’s English.

We think we can do that because we believe a person has to understand the meaning of the text correctly to be able to translate it correctly. Furthermore, one’s theology always affects the way that person will translate the text. It is our assertion that there are theological issues that we understand more correctly than most translators, and thus our translation will reflect that theology.

link to STF REV translation web page

Personally – I don’t trust JAL or anyone who contributes to the REV translation. I believe folks need to take another look at “the gold” they took when they left TWI; granted, it may be shiny and look like gold in their minds; but that makes me think of fool’s gold - you know a lot of folks have been tricked by a brassy yellow mineral like pyrite - mistaking it for gold.

MRAP, I think I understand what you are saying “past TWI involvement does not make a person bad, otherwise, we are all bad.” I’m not fond of using such broad painting strokes when discussing issues with TWI. And believe it or not I tend to give people the benefit of a doubt…

 if I may be permitted to adopt your statement into something that I think respects the individuality and conscience of folks: TWI is saturated with toxic doctrine and practices; it takes a brave individual to think outside the TWI mindset and see the subversive nature of their doctrine and practices which tend to undermine intellectual honesty and one’s inner sense of what is right and wrong. I can respect whether that person then chooses to leave TWI or stay and try to reform it.

 If they stay in with the intent to reform - I cannot fault them if they are being intellectually honest and following their conscience; personally I think they’ll be fighting a losing battle – like I said TWI is saturated with toxic doctrine and practices….Perhaps some folks look at their years of involvement and don’t want to throw away all they’ve invested…I can understand that – I tend to think along the lines of cut your losses – abandon a course of action that is clearly going to be unsuccessful before I suffer more loss or harm.

 

 

On 10/7/2016 at 9:56 PM, JayDee said:

I guess my question MRAP is what do you mean by well constructed?

John S@&oenh#it said he primarily chose the ASV of 1901 as text to develop the REV. One of my concerns is peer review of the REV. What scholars were/are involved? I'm paraphrasing some here, but he said the text was changed where necessary? Who determines what's necessary? If 20-30 scholars are involved like the NRSV or NIV, and others, that's one thing. If it's 1guy who decided he wanted his own translation, that's another thing. Academic credentials do carry some weight IMO when it comes to a project like a new version of scripture. 

Great post JayDee ! I agree with your sentiment; genuine biblical scholars usually have some intellectual honesty – especially when compared to the self-assuming types at TWI and offshoots.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-Bone had a good response, basically, if I had a question about the REV, then post it on the doctrinal forum, which I have done.  My question here was about the REV in general (thought there might be some new folks outside the ol'e guard).  Still, the attack is against those involved with the REV and not the stuff in the REV itself; in essence, in my ignorant sort of logic I would interpret that as meaning the ol'e guard here has not found anything incorrect in the REV or never took the time to read it.  Hey, I'm O.K. with all that, to include the insults: does not take much to touch a nerve around this place.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, MRAP said:

T-Bone had a good response, basically, if I had a question about the REV, then post it on the doctrinal forum, which I have done.  My question here was about the REV in general (thought there might be some new folks outside the ol'e guard).  Still, the attack is against those involved with the REV and not the stuff in the REV itself; in essence, in my ignorant sort of logic I would interpret that as meaning the ol'e guard here has not found anything incorrect in the REV or never took the time to read it.  Hey, I'm O.K. with all that, to include the insults: does not take much to touch a nerve around this place.

Hey MRAP,

I’m glad you said something about that…seems like I’m always late to the party…anyway…I rarely look in doctrinal but after seeing your post I checked it out and sure enough you started a thread waaaaaaaay back in March of 2015! Even though the party may be over I posted something there anyway being the blather-puss that I am.

Love and peace

T-Bone

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the last thing I posted in the doctrinal forum, regarding something I questioned in the REV, was about the prophecy of Caiaphas regarding the need to kill Jesus..

I expect that this is a good time to exit this forum topic but would like to say to any new folks on the GSC that we often have quite heated discussions and that is something you would never be allowed to do in The Way - rank always was the last word in the matter - not the case here.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been on Greasespot in... what has it been... about two years? The other day, I became curious about what TLTF and STFI have been up to. After going to their websites and finding nothing but the expected boilerplate yada yada, I came here to this thread. Needless to say, DWBH never disappoints!

Between 2003 and 2008 I taught Humane Letters at a classical academy, and from 2011 until 2016 I was doing post grad work in theological studies. I originally went into the post grad work to get formal accreditation to teach and to pick up Greek as a subject I could teach at a classical academy. So... even though I will not be able to complete my masters due to health problems... I have taught professionally, and I have studied under actual professors! My scholarship has been informally recognized as sound by professional scholars.

The CES boys, for all the writing and "classes" they churn out, are nothing but rank amateurs who lack genuine self-awareness. The reason they don't dialogue with others in the field of theology is because, if they did, their own ignorance would be shown for what it is, and they would have nothing... and I mean NOTHING AT ALL... left.

The whole idea of a recorded "class" such as PFAL or its legion of knock-offs is bogus. A "class" in which the students can ask no questions is not a real class. During a class the instructor uses the students' questions as feedback to gauge how well she or he is communicating. I have taken several classes for credit that were recorded, and I always had to keep a log of questions to be reviewed by the professor who was overseeing my work, as well as to write a final paper.

I have had to take two semesters over again because hospitalizations interrupted my work. I have had the same classes taught by the same professors, and I can say for a surety that no two classes are ever identical. The understanding of an actual teacher grows, and that growth is reflected in how the class is taught. The lack of ability to reflect growth is one of the huge drawbacks to recorded classes.

I used to know John Lynn as well as any of his thousands of "closest friends" did. I liked his public persona and relied on his leadership after The Way International went to pieces. After Momentus, he lost whatever shreds of humility he had left. Theologically, he is stuck in a dead end rut. He is not serving Jesus or the Word of God. He is serving his own arrogance. I am sorry to hear of his physical problems, having a few of my own, but it astonishes me that he relies on quack medicine as much as he does on quack theology.

I've got some comments on the REV, MRAP, but I'll post those on your doctrinal thread!

Love,

Steve     

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice seeing you again Steve! So sorry about your physical ailments. I am glad you have continued your education in spite of the medical challenges.

Your posts concerning the scriptural farce called STFI, TLTF, and their prepubescent REV are always filled with excellent Biblical information documenting their blatant incompetence at "translating" and at the same time "not privately interpreting"(sic!) the Bible. Schoenheit has been at this for a long time now. All lynn does is nod his head and take what he wants for his idiotic Bible road shows and ridiculously hyperbolized "classes", which are simply piffle do-overs! Latest example is their JC:DOA comedy sketch. Filled with ego, arrogance, and error upon error along with the requisite plagiarism of every pfal redux.

MRAP has been whining about "not getting any answers" to his redundant and annoying REV posts since 3/15/15. He has a hard time listening to all the answers he's gotten over the last 2 years. Still asking the same banal questions as if there is ANY value of ANY kind to the REV. He may need a remedial reading program or something, I don't know, but his reading comprehension seems somewhat "challenged" to me. Good luck down there in Doctrinal!

Thanks for posting Steve! Always good reading you. I pray your health will improve and afford you the opportunity to complete your studies to your satisfaction. I bid you Godspeed and peace.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Wow DWeeBH, I ain't posted in almost 4 months and some how you need to bring up my name, and patronize Steve to inform him of my "whining".  What, you need an alley?




As of this writing, I have read Steve's dissertation, quite good and way above my pay grade.




I know you are looking for a confrontation Mr. IVth corp but Iv'e kinda grown outa that stuff.




I have to ask you a question DWBH: who is the most redundant, my asking about the REV or your consistent posts on numerous forums bashing TWI for, well, how many years now?  You just keep blasting on TWI with the same stuff.  I agree with you DWBH, TWI deserves it but don't say that I am redundant.




Now, for anyone new here to the Grease Spot Cafe, we have fun bantering and as I must admit, I am very thankful for Don't Worry Be Happy as he/she got me back into reading more of the Gospel records as well as the Pauline Epistles, it's a balance, in my reading practices if I must say.




The Grease Spot Cafe is a great place for healing, learning and also good ole locker room BS.




 




 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MRAP, what is it going to take to get you to roll over for another long winter's nap?  Another 3 or 4 months would be good.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops, difference from main stream gsc thought is not welcome, got the message.  Funny, I thought I was missed given that DWBH dissed on me even though I had not posted anything for months.  Well, love to the sisters and brothers.  Yawn, time for that 3 or 4 month nap.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MRAP said:

Oops, difference from main stream gsc thought is not welcome, got the message.  Funny, I thought I was missed given that DWBH dissed on me even though I had not posted anything for months.  Well, love to the sisters and brothers.  Yawn, time for that 3 or 4 month nap.

 

Nice try. Again, it's a matter of the purpose of this website and these forums. Love to you to, sir... and I hope your discussion of the REV in the doctrinal forum is more personally satisfying to you. :wave:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 1:22 AM, MRAP said:

Still, the attack is against those involved with the REV and not the stuff in the REV itself; in essence, in my ignorant sort of logic I would interpret that as meaning the ol'e guard here has not found anything incorrect in the REV or never took the time to read it.

Plenty of information here about the calibre and credentials those putting together this REV.

You wouldn't necessarily expect the authors of, say, Dick and Jane books to be as proficient in English literature as, say,  Shakespeare or perhaps John Steinbeck or Mark Twain.  So you would tend to take the D&J authors rather less seriously, if they were to announce D&J or any other like work, as a great work of literature.  And if they launched into anything else, some other kind of writing, you'd expect peer review,  support from established patrons or authors, etc. 

Without looking at REV, I'd be suspicious that it was the equivalent of kids' book authors trying to be literary giants.  Just not quite the ring of credibility you'd want. Might be okay as froth, pulp fiction, but credible literature... no.

Surely it's an author's role to convince his readers of his credibility and that its worth the reader's tIme to read - not the readers who have to make excuses or defend the work...?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a reporter. I cover criminal trials. I cover a lot of criminal trials. I probably know more about the law regarding crime than you do. However, if you were arrested, and I tried to represent you in court, I could probably go to jail for that. Regardless of the (assumed for the sake of argument) fact that my knowledge of the subject is greater than yours, it does not mean in any way shape or form that I am qualified to practice law.

The developers of the REV have as much business constructing a new translation of the scriptures as I have practicing law. 

 

Edited by Raf
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Commenting on the REV.  The major flaw I see in it is its roots.  What roots you say?   The roots of scholarly modeling what VPW did in his works.  What scholarly model you say is this?  Why, plagiarism, lack of peer review, lack of source citation, lack of collaboration with educational entities of the day and time, and other such egotistical and isolationist flaws that in our modern world consist of red flags to a genuine scholarly work.  

In it's least common denominator it is a commentary.  Is it wrong to like a commentary?  No, different strokes for different folks.  Controversial stories and commentaries on the Bible and Christ have been around for a while.  I'm thinking right now of a work, "The Last Temptation of Christ" - a historical novel by Nikos Kazantzakis.  The novel, published in 1960, was later the inspiration for an equally controversial movie adaptation in 1988 released by Martin Scorsese.   I know that has nothing to do with the topic - consider it added color commentary :)  

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now