Oneness Pentecostal Apologetics Conference

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Trinitarians have NOT been translating a bible for the purpose of upholding, supporting, and propagating their version of the trinity. To believe that is to become a whacked out conspiracy theorist, that for centuries they've conspired to stick to those oneness people.

The Unitarians? Well, if you wanna be grouped with them, have at it.

Did someone say the OPs were going to translate a bible for the purpose of upholding,supporting and propagating their version of the Oneness"?

BTW Many scholars would actually argue the Trinitarians HAVE in fact translated the bible with the purpose of supporting the Trinity and or the Deity of Christ.. Anyone hear of Joseph Thayer??? Unitarian NOW.

Trinitarians translated monogenes as "Only Begotten" for many years when in reality it means "One and only" or "Only Unique".

Why should I trust a Trinitarian any more than anyone else? If they have the scholarship under their belts, let them give it a try

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

...

Why should I trust a Trinitarian any more than anyone else? If they have the scholarship under their belts, let them give it a try

Good point, but a big IF.

[SteppingStone]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

For those unaware, M.D. Treece received honors, from Princeton, for being the FIRST to translate the book of Revelations from the Chester Beatty papyri

That sounds interesting. Is there an online copy avail?

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JN Anderson

For those unaware, M.D. Treece received honors, from Princeton, for being the FIRST to translate the book of Revelations from the Chester Beatty papyri

Is that correct? Does anyone have a resource for this?

And what was the honor? A honorary doctorate? Where is his doctorate from that gave him the scholarly repute to be able to exegete Revelation?

[Praxeas]

Alternate translations might prove interesting. Even Trinitarians scholars reveal certain verses might be translated differently such as

Heb 1:8 But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.

Normally a verse that shows the Son is God...Yet even Trinitarians agree it can be translated "God is your throne" or something like that


RWP
It is not certain whether ho theos is here the vocative (address with the nominative form as in Joh_20:28 with the Messiah termed theos as is possible, Joh_1:18) or ho theos is nominative (subject or predicate) with estin (is) understood: “God is thy throne” or “Thy throne is God.” Either makes good sense.

NET bible commentary
Or possibly, "Your throne is God forever and ever." This translation is quite doubtful, however, since (1) in the context the Son is being contrasted to the angels and is presented as far better than they. The imagery of God being the Son's throne would seem to be of God being his authority. If so, in what sense could this not be said of the angels? In what sense is the Son thus contrasted with the angels? (2) The μέν...δέ (men...de) construction that connects Heb_1:7 with Heb_1:8 clearly lays out this contrast: "On the one hand, he says of the angels...on the other hand, he says of the Son." Thus, although it is grammatically possible that θεός (theos) in Heb_1:8 should be taken as a predicate nominative, the context and the correlative conjunctions are decidedly against it. Heb_1:8 is thus a strong affirmation of the deity of Christ.

Vincents Word Studies
I retain the vocative, although the translation of the Hebrew is doubtful. The following renderings have been proposed: “thy throne (which is a throne) of God”: “thy throne is (a throne) of God”: “God is thy throne.” Some suspect that the Hebrew text is defective.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Is that correct? Does anyone have a resource for this?

And what was the honor? A honorary doctorate? Where is his doctorate from that gave him the scholarly repute to be able to exegete Revelation?

The "Book of Revelation" contained among the Chester Beatty papyri consists of 10 leaves in "rough" handwriting. The text only includes chapters 9 through 17.

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/papyri_bruce.pdf

I would be interested in hearing more about this honor from Princeton and Bro. Treece's work with the Chester Beatty Library. The last time I heard him speak he was assuring his audience that the "Face" on Mars was a genuine colossal artifact created by fallen angels before they came and consorted with earthly women.

He expounded the whole Richard Hoagland/Zechariah Stitchin nonsense. Where did Bro. Treece acquire his doctorate?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Trinitarians have NOT been translating a bible for the purpose of upholding, supporting, and propagating their version of the trinity. To believe that is to become a whacked out conspiracy theorist, that for centuries they've conspired to stick to those oneness people.

If you believe there is no theological bias in the translation process then you are whacked.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Did someone say the OPs were going to translate a bible for the purpose of upholding,supporting and propagating their version of the Oneness"?

BTW Many scholars would actually argue the Trinitarians HAVE in fact translated the bible with the purpose of supporting the Trinity and or the Deity of Christ.. Anyone hear of Joseph Thayer??? Unitarian NOW.

Trinitarians translated monogenes as "Only Begotten" for many years when in reality it means "One and only" or "Only Unique".

Why should I trust a Trinitarian any more than anyone else? If they have the scholarship under their belts, let them give it a try

I've predicted for years that the OPs were going to produce their own version of the bible at some point. I still think they will as the Jehovah's Witnesses with their version have done.

The OPs are slowly losing their distinction from mainstream Christianity, something the leadership will not allow, IMO. The movement is built upon the foundation of being exclusive, the sole possessors of the real truth, and without that it will simply melt into just being another sect within the thousands of Christian sects.

A new bible would prevent that from happening. OPs could again believe they were the only true Christians on earth per their real bible with the real truth.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by pelathais

The "Book of Revelation" contained among the Chester Beatty papyri consists of 10 leaves in "rough" handwriting. The text only includes chapters 9 through 17.

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/papyri_bruce.pdf

I would be interested in hearing more about this honor from Princeton and Bro. Treece's work with the Chester Beatty Library. The last time I heard him speak he was assuring his audience that the "Face" on Mars was a genuine colossal artifact created by fallen angels before they came and consorted with earthly women.

He expounded the whole Richard Hoagland/Zechariah Stitchin nonsense. Where did Bro. Treece acquire his doctorate?

I am interested in hearing this also ...

and then someone can explain to me how his son, Ricky, can hold license in the UPCI and WPF and have his church affiliated with both ...

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

If you believe there is no theological bias in the translation process then you are whacked.

Here is the thing though, most modern translation have a wide cross section of views that are brought to the translation. Not just one denomination. So the bias is balanced by varying viewpoints. If the UPCI wanted to produce a study Bible like the Spirit Filled Study Bible or something like that that you know is going to have a twist to it, my daughter has a Justice and Poverty Bible but you know the slant.

The UPCI takes issue with a few passages that don't fit well in their theology, a study Bible would seem to be a better use of time and resources than re-translating passages that would look 99% like every other modern translation. A New Oneness Translation (NOT)would be a public relations nightmare and the label of cult would be hard to shake. It just smacks of the JWs.

And so far there has not been one person put forward that has verifiable credentials in the Oneness camp that could undertake such a task, much less a committee full of them. As much as I love the teachings of Dr. Segraves his education doesn't lend itself to translations, nor does Bernard or Crownover.