Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor - TT'ers

Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:42:25 -0800

He was not a translator ir did any work on the translation  --   Who cares if some cultist decides to "repent?"  
 
 
 
 
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:58:08 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor - TT'ers

Why did he repent and what part did he repent of?
F LOGSDON said "At any rate we went out and started on a feasibility report, and I encouraged him to go ahead with it. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord, because I encouraged him to go ahead with it. We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped to interview some of the translators; I sat with the translators; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words."
 
Read the rest of the article to see.
 
Just like LDS one little mistake provides opportunity to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
In the LDS sphere, once one makes such a mistake their NEVER to be taken seriously again.
No need to read the article if one wants to avoid the SUBJECT.
 
The fact that someone was mistaken on what part Logsdon played has NO BEARING on the SUBJECT of LOGSDON's TESTIMONY!
THE LOCKMAN FOUNDATION?S TESTIMONY  in some deatils stands in direct CONFLICT with Mr Logsdon's. Somebody is not being honest.
 
Here is the rest of the paragraph, which is PARTIALLY QUOTED in a previous post, to shield you from the WHOLE TRUTH
I have three witnesses to Logsdon's involvement with the NASV that would stand up in a court of law: First, there is Logsdon's own spoken testimony which we have on audio cassette. This has been authenticated by Christians who knew him. Second, we know that Logsdon's widow in Wheaton, Illinois, has authenticated his testimony in regard to the NASV. Third, we have a copy of a letter from Logsdon to Cecil Carter of Prince George, British Columbia, June 9, 1977. I have known Brother Carter for many years. He is a faithful elder in a Brethren assembly and a respected member of his community.
Part of the problem has been caused by some who have made claims for Logsdon which he did not himself make. Note that Logsdon never said that he actually worked on the NASV or the Amplified Bible translation or that he was an actual employee of the Lockman Foundation. He did not claim to be "co-founder" of the NASV. He said he was a friend of Lockman and as such was invited to come out to California and help launch the venture. According to his own testimony and that of his widow, that is precisely what he did. Logsdon was a highly respected Bible teacher and author, and there is certainly no reason why he would have lied about these matters. He had nothing to gain thereby. To the contrary, he was considered a nut by many of his peers for taking a stand against the modern versions.
 
 


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The claim was first posed to this forum as a rumor  --   with no names, details, or supporting evidence.
You now restate the claim (that a TRANSLATOR of the NASV repented) and once again have associated me with the "accuser."  You and others just cannot have a discussion without making personal attacks.  It is apparently impossible, in your case and Mr Deegan's.  The following is a statement taken from a conservative Baptist KJV only site concerning this rumor of a TRANSLATOR repenting:
 
Part of the problem has been caused by some who have made claims for Logsdon which he did not himself make. Note that Logsdon never said that he actually worked on the NASV or the Amplified Bible translation or that he was an actual employee of the Lockman Foundation. He did not claim to be "co-founder" of the NASV.
 
 
 
Have a nice day.   Apparently the "accuser" has changed residences  !!!!   :--)
 
JD
 
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <jandgtaylor1@juno.com>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:32:09 -0500
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor - TT'ers

Another baseless accusation JD?  how is it that some ppl just can't learn to recognize the accuser when he comes?
What you call a "silly rumor" is as follows:  The NASV translator is Dr. Frank Logsdon and he writes:
 
"I must under God renounce every attachment to eh New American Standard. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord .. We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface.
 
I'm in trouble; I can't refute these arguments; its wrong, it's terribly wrong; it's fighteningly wrong and what am I going to do about it?  I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them ...
 
When questions began to reach me at first I was quite offended. However, in attempting to answer, I began to sense that something was not right about the NASV.  Upon investigation, I wrote my very dear friend, Mr. Lockman, explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV.  The product is grievous to my heart and helps to complicate matters in these already troublous times...The deletions are absolutely frightening .. there are so many .. Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?
 
I don't want anything to do with it ...
The finest leaders that we have today ... haven't gone into it (the new version's use of a corrupted Greek text), just as I hadn't gone into it ... That's how easily one can be deceived .. I'm going to talk to him (Dr. George Sweeing, then president of Moody Bible Institute) about these things ... You can say the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct. How correct?  100% correct! ... If you must stand against everyone else, stand."
 
 
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:21:58 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"That guy" did not "repent" of anything.   Just a silly rumor.   NASV is based upon a greek text that is older than the Church controlled Byzantine text of the 1500's.   There is nothing sinister or worthy of "repentance" in the translating of the NASV.  The fact that no one is going to answer the questions I asked of deegan is evidence to me of the weakness of your argument.       Dean , you use the KJ translatio n to defeat the NASV while completely missing the point of the various translations and assuming the very thing that is in question   -------------   the supremacy of the KJ bible. 
 
Jd  
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Dean Moore <cd_moore@earthlink.net>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 07:57:03 -0500
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor - TT'ers

 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
To: [email protected]
Sent: 11/20/2005 7:21:16 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] corrector/revisor - TT'ers

 
 
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 06:56:04 -0500 "Dean Moore" <cd_moore@earthlink.net> writes:
cd: I don't believe we have to go to that extreme:-) As we do not hold to the versions that do this-also there is a difference between the degree of altercations in the NASV and the Book of Mormon-huge difference. One left off words or made mistakes while the other was turned into a complete new religion by Smith.
 
I hear what you are saying Dean - ATST it is hypocritical to castigate them while doing the same thing ourselves in the name of scholarship.  I read somewhere that one of the NASB translators had a change of heart and repented for the part he played in that translation.  The NIV which is used in most churches today is one of the worst offenders. Cutting the second part of Romans 8:1 out is a real travesty that leads ppl to believe that all they must do to be free from condemnation is to say their prayer.  Never mind walking after the Spirit and not fulfilli ng the lust of the flesh, it's OK to remain ignorant about that.  No wonder the professing church is so sick...
 
cd: Thank you for that info on Romans 8:1 It was as you stated in the Greek and the Hebrew. KJ right again. Glad to hear that Guy repented sis :-)
 
Dean writes:
The problem I have with the NASV is it took the words of Jesus away

DAVEH:   I wonder if the TTers who have criticized me (LDS theology) for adding/subtracting from the Word are as critical when they view the NASV or other translations that s eemingly change what is conveyed i n Bible.   Again....just pondering this out loud.....no need to respond, Dean.
 
cd : Good point Dave-and I think it deserves an answer. Brothers and Sisters in Christ do you have an answer for Daves question as to why we allow our Bibles to remove God's words with no objections and cut Smith to pieces for doing the same thing???
 
I second both DaveH and Dean's observations but haven't seen many responses thus far.  What is the difference between
using Gk and exegesis to correct what is written and the Mormon stance which says they will accept the Word of God insofar as it is correctly translated.  Both are saying/doing the same thing which puts truth at the mercy of smart men and their scholarship.
So the Plumbline is now removed.  It is time to apologize to the Mormons and repent....
 

                                         judyt                                       
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments
                              is a liar (1 John 2:4)
 


 

                                         judyt                                       
He that says "I know Him" and doesn't keep His Commandments
                              is a liar (1 John 2:4)

Reply via email to