<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Boo&#8230; Theologically Manipulated Translation. Boo&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/</link>
	<description>Telling the story of the story-bound God</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:08:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: David Gregg</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-1413</link>
		<dc:creator>David Gregg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 03:48:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-1413</guid>
		<description>Either way, I don&#039;t understand the argument here, for three reasons:

1) The statement begins with &quot;In Christ Jesus...&quot; which indicates to me that Paul isn&#039;t trying to make a statement about Salvation (in context, he&#039;s speaking to Christians about *their* faith)--which you might say is the process of moving from &quot;not in Christ Jesus&quot; to &quot;in Christ Jesus&quot;. Here Paul is talking about life *in Christ Jesus.*

2) What is the difference between saying that faith &quot;works&quot; through love, or that faith &quot;expresses itself&quot; through love? Practically speaking, how are people going to interpret those two statements any differently? Both mean, roughly, &quot;I have confidence in Christ and that causes me&quot;--you might say &quot;energizes me&quot;--&quot;to love people.&quot;

3) Even if my first point isn&#039;t true, and Paul were trying to make a point about salvation, it still doesn&#039;t make &quot;working through&quot; or &quot;expressing itself through&quot; mean any different from each other on a functional level, and it still depends upon the reader to decide whether Paul is saying that Salvation is dependent upon the *faith* that &quot;works through love&quot;, or upon the &quot;working through love&quot; that faith does.

I mean no offence when I give my opinion that the only problem here is that we have come to the place in western Christianity where buzz words like &quot;work&quot; and &quot;obedience&quot; have become saturated with negative connotations and saddled with unnecessary meanings. Obviously, love does stuff. You do things because you love someone. Obviously, faith does stuff. You do things because you have faith in someone. Does it make it any better or worse for me to say &quot;love expresses itself&quot; or &quot;love works&quot;--&quot;faith expresses itself&quot; or &quot;faith works&quot;? --I don&#039;t know why we can&#039;t just let Paul say that, without assuming he&#039;s trying to lay down a soteriological edict.

:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Either way, I don&#8217;t understand the argument here, for three reasons:</p>
<p>1) The statement begins with &#8220;In Christ Jesus&#8230;&#8221; which indicates to me that Paul isn&#8217;t trying to make a statement about Salvation (in context, he&#8217;s speaking to Christians about *their* faith)&#8211;which you might say is the process of moving from &#8220;not in Christ Jesus&#8221; to &#8220;in Christ Jesus&#8221;. Here Paul is talking about life *in Christ Jesus.*</p>
<p>2) What is the difference between saying that faith &#8220;works&#8221; through love, or that faith &#8220;expresses itself&#8221; through love? Practically speaking, how are people going to interpret those two statements any differently? Both mean, roughly, &#8220;I have confidence in Christ and that causes me&#8221;&#8211;you might say &#8220;energizes me&#8221;&#8211;&#8221;to love people.&#8221;</p>
<p>3) Even if my first point isn&#8217;t true, and Paul were trying to make a point about salvation, it still doesn&#8217;t make &#8220;working through&#8221; or &#8220;expressing itself through&#8221; mean any different from each other on a functional level, and it still depends upon the reader to decide whether Paul is saying that Salvation is dependent upon the *faith* that &#8220;works through love&#8221;, or upon the &#8220;working through love&#8221; that faith does.</p>
<p>I mean no offence when I give my opinion that the only problem here is that we have come to the place in western Christianity where buzz words like &#8220;work&#8221; and &#8220;obedience&#8221; have become saturated with negative connotations and saddled with unnecessary meanings. Obviously, love does stuff. You do things because you love someone. Obviously, faith does stuff. You do things because you have faith in someone. Does it make it any better or worse for me to say &#8220;love expresses itself&#8221; or &#8220;love works&#8221;&#8211;&#8221;faith expresses itself&#8221; or &#8220;faith works&#8221;? &#8211;I don&#8217;t know why we can&#8217;t just let Paul say that, without assuming he&#8217;s trying to lay down a soteriological edict.</p>
<p> <img src='http://www.jrdkirk.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Top Translation Traps: Relying on Structure &#171; God Didn&#39;t Say That</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-1221</link>
		<dc:creator>Top Translation Traps: Relying on Structure &#171; God Didn&#39;t Say That</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-1221</guid>
		<description>[...] I discussed energeo (responding to discussions by J.R. Daniel Kirk and on BBB &#8212; then BBB followed up, as did T.C. Robinson), one comment noted that I [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I discussed energeo (responding to discussions by J.R. Daniel Kirk and on BBB &#8212; then BBB followed up, as did T.C. Robinson), one comment noted that I [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Biblical Studies Carnival LI &#171; Anumma</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-1119</link>
		<dc:creator>Biblical Studies Carnival LI &#171; Anumma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:05:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-1119</guid>
		<description>[...] translation, David Ker at Better Bibles engages a post by Daniel Kirk at Storied Theology on theological manipulation in a translation of Gal [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] translation, David Ker at Better Bibles engages a post by Daniel Kirk at Storied Theology on theological manipulation in a translation of Gal [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faith working through love in Galatians 5:6? &#171; Paul&#8217;s Epistle to the Galatians</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-886</link>
		<dc:creator>Faith working through love in Galatians 5:6? &#171; Paul&#8217;s Epistle to the Galatians</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:26:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-886</guid>
		<description>[...] 22, 2010 &#183; Leave a Comment  J. R. Daniel Kirk has stated emphatically that Galatians 5:6 should be translated as &#8220;faith working through love&#8221; in opposition [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 22, 2010 &middot; Leave a Comment  J. R. Daniel Kirk has stated emphatically that Galatians 5:6 should be translated as &#8220;faith working through love&#8221; in opposition [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Semantics put to work on Galatians 5:6 &#171; Better Bibles Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-878</link>
		<dc:creator>Semantics put to work on Galatians 5:6 &#171; Better Bibles Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:39:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-878</guid>
		<description>[...] put to work on Galatians&#160;5:6  There has been quite some discussion on various blogs over the post by Daniel Kirk (no relation of mine) suggesting that translations of Galatians 5:6 are &#8220;theologically [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] put to work on Galatians&nbsp;5:6  There has been quite some discussion on various blogs over the post by Daniel Kirk (no relation of mine) suggesting that translations of Galatians 5:6 are &#8220;theologically [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: How Not To Use Context &#171; God Didn&#39;t Say That</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-843</link>
		<dc:creator>How Not To Use Context &#171; God Didn&#39;t Say That</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-843</guid>
		<description>[...] to make our translation say X.&#8221; For example, in translating Galatians 5:6 (recently discussed here, here and by me here), some people try to figure out what Paul believed about circumcision, faith, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to make our translation say X.&#8221; For example, in translating Galatians 5:6 (recently discussed here, here and by me here), some people try to figure out what Paul believed about circumcision, faith, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faith, Love, and What Matters in Galatians 5:6 &#171; God Didn&#39;t Say That</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-841</link>
		<dc:creator>Faith, Love, and What Matters in Galatians 5:6 &#171; God Didn&#39;t Say That</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 19:57:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-841</guid>
		<description>[...] Love, and What Matters in Galatians&#160;5:6 A conversation started by J.R. Daniel Kirk at Stories Theology (picked up by BBB here), addresses two questions: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Love, and What Matters in Galatians&nbsp;5:6 A conversation started by J.R. Daniel Kirk at Stories Theology (picked up by BBB here), addresses two questions: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chaka</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-837</link>
		<dc:creator>Chaka</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-837</guid>
		<description>Six of one, half dozen of the other, if you ask me. I don&#039;t see that much difference between the translations, unless you&#039;re coming to the text with the question &quot;Is faith versus works a fundamental dichotomy in the gospel?&quot;

Granted, the evangelical and/or lightly churched audiences that read most of these Bibles probably already have the dichotomy in their heads, and the translators are probably avoiding the word &quot;works&quot; to prevent cognitive dissonance. Sort of the same way translations avoid saying that God &quot;repented,&quot; since repentance in our churchy language means &quot;to feel sorry for committing sin.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Six of one, half dozen of the other, if you ask me. I don&#8217;t see that much difference between the translations, unless you&#8217;re coming to the text with the question &#8220;Is faith versus works a fundamental dichotomy in the gospel?&#8221;</p>
<p>Granted, the evangelical and/or lightly churched audiences that read most of these Bibles probably already have the dichotomy in their heads, and the translators are probably avoiding the word &#8220;works&#8221; to prevent cognitive dissonance. Sort of the same way translations avoid saying that God &#8220;repented,&#8221; since repentance in our churchy language means &#8220;to feel sorry for committing sin.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J. R. Daniel Kirk</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-816</link>
		<dc:creator>J. R. Daniel Kirk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 05:36:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-816</guid>
		<description>Ian, Scot McKnight has called me a Reformed Anabaptist. I have no idea what he means, but I sorta like the sound of it and hope he&#039;s right!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ian, Scot McKnight has called me a Reformed Anabaptist. I have no idea what he means, but I sorta like the sound of it and hope he&#8217;s right!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Packer</title>
		<link>http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/19/boo-theologically-manipulated-translation-boo/#comment-814</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Packer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 04:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=265#comment-814</guid>
		<description>Damn right, Daniel... we&#039;ll make an Anabaptist of you yet!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Damn right, Daniel&#8230; we&#8217;ll make an Anabaptist of you yet!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

