Posted by doug [doug] on March 29, 1999 at 17:27:18 {JgGWpI0TP.dME16QZ4iAMW.px4jlZiJt2}:
In Reply to: Divine Name in New Testament posted by Rick on March 29, 1999 at 12:00:03:
Rick,
I'd like to concur with what AF and JH have said here. Their comments show WHY no translators except Frederick Franz import the divine name into the NT. It's not a conspiracy; it's the result of following universally accepted rules of translation, such as: You translate what is IN a ms., not what you think may have been or should have been or absolutely had to have been in it. Think about it for a moment: would you trust a translator who followed any other rule?
Now, as to the cited evidence that the NT writers had mss. of the OT that included the divine name, this evidence seems to consist only of 1 fragment from a Qumran document...am I right? Not much to go on, is it?
Theories, ancient or modern, about Matthew's having been written in Hebrew don't go anywhere near supplying a ms. of the NT that includes the divine name. As has been said, there are thousands of NT mss., and not one has it. To put it into a translation of the Bible is patently wrong, whether one Baptist scholar can be found to argue somewhere within a thousand miles of the practice or not.
Best,
doug