Wycliffe: Transparency or Spin in Bible Translation Controversy?

The author of this article didn't seem to mention WHICH WYCLIFFE this was. Wycliffe USA? Wycliffe Associates? Wycliffe UK? Wycliffe AU? Makes me wonder if they really know about what or whom they may be referring. Wycliffe Associates state that they are using Father, Son & Holy Spirit. So where does this leave this article? Wasted internet space.

People can argue all they like, but the Truth is that God is the only One who can name Himself. The Bible, written of God and by God, calls Him, the Lord God Jehovah. (Our Heavenly Father.) His only begotten Son, who is the Living Word, is called the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, not Mahdi or Allah. Those names belong to the Islamic god and can never pertain to the Christian God! That's why Christians are upset.

I find it very interesting that there are so many comments that are uninformed. The issue of Wycliffe is less linguistic (as a linguist you can argue anything under the guise of academia) and more theological (which requires the body of Christ to contribute). However, Wycliffe has failed miserably at both.

1) In linguistics they say that the words Father and Son in Turkish, Arabic, Malay, Bengali, Urdu, Pakistani, Indonesian, and other languages have a sexual connotation. Wycliffe made a policy change last year stating clearly they would use literal translations for Father and Son, except in a few rare cases where that language doesn't have the meaning intended. They say in these languages, Father and Son means sex took place. The problem is, Arabic linguists and natives have made a resounding answer, NO! Hussein the writer of this article knows arabic, and can confirm. I know Turkish and can confirm this. Father and Son in these languages do not have any more sexual connotation than Father or Son in English or any other language. Wycliffe has created a straw man argument. The scary thing is, they absolutely know this. This is deception plain and clear. Not only academic dishonesty, but flat out unethical for a Christian organization to allow in their midst.

2) Theologically Wycliffe has gone off the deep-end. First they make the tragic theological error and say that the Father and Son relationship is metaphorical. It is not. Church council after church council and the Bible is clear, that the relationship between the Father and Son is more than metaphorical. Jesus isn't like a Son. He is the Son. God the Father isn't like a Father, He is the Father. It is actually heretical to say it is metaphorical. Of course nominal christians think this too, but it's shocking for Wycliffe to stake their argument on obviously bad theology. No only this, but Wycliffe says they believe the Word of God is inspired, but they do not stand by the belief of Verbal Plenary Inspiration. If they did, they would believe that the Words Father and Son are indeed the Words chosen by God. So their statement of faith is misleading. You can be a Wycliffe translator and believe God inspired the Bible, but not believe that it is today. This is the problem folks. They have no fear of God in playing fast and loose with the scriptures.

3) Ethically, Wycliffe has failed. They have slandered other believers. Lying about them and trying to discredit them when what they are saying is truth. Any of you who dare to try to slander, lie about, or harm people who are sincerely concerned about the Word of God being changed, shame on you, and the judgement of God will cover you. They have called Biblical Missiology 'Satan's Tools'. and from the comments here, many of you have slandered Mr. Hussein. If you are Christian, shame. Turn, repent, and you owe Mr. Hussein an apology. You are sinning against your brother and turning this into a Matthew 18 issue. What Biblical Missiology has done, after years of trying to get Wycliffe to turn by speaking to them face-to-face) has brought the dark deeds of Wycliffe to light because they are being deceptive and abusing donors funds. Such things are not a Matthew 18 issue, but a public rebuking is required because what they are teaching is false teachings, and as such required public rebuking as Paul and the early church leaders always did.

Al: When in front of a judge, he will say "just answer the question." Wycliffe is under scrutiny if you like it or not. Can it just answer the two questions Hussein is asking?
a. How could Wycliffe let such statements stand?
b. When will Wycliffe account for what many are seeing as glaring contradictions in its statements?
Your allegations of spin and yellow journalism would be thrown out of court as grandstanding. Sorry.

When you consider that Wycliffe Bible Translators-SIL pulls in $100 million a year or so, primarily from donations of those who profess too be conservatively evangelical this IS a big deal. The author has done a great service by showing the backtracking and contradictory statements that Wycliffe has issued. He gives some proper disclosure to something that one would expect an organization professing to be conservatively evangelical would have disclosed as they fundraise for these "meaning-based" and "heart language" "translations."

First, we should note that this is a discussion about how to address God and his son, Jesus. This is a matter where we can have various opinions. Different cultures do it differently, we should be sensitive to that.
We should worry if the critical statements from Jesus and his disciples are changed - for instance John 14: 10 - 11. As long as that is there, the thousand plus years of scholarship behind the Bible can give us the details.

I am blown away how quickly people are willing to pick up the stones and throw them based on comments that are neither truthful or reflective of God's Spirit. Wycliffe is an organization who for 80 some years has strived to accurately translate God's Word into languages that Bibleless people around the world desperately need. Yet a couple individuals, claiming to be Christians start hurtling sensationalized boulders in a veiled attempt to destroy the organization that is doing the tremendous job of reaching these Bibleless people with God's life-changing Word. The Lord rebuke you Mr. Wario. You are being used by Satan in an attempt to derail God's work. Yes God's work, not Wycliffe's work, but God's work around the world. Work that many have paid with their lives so that God's Word would be known to these people.

What? Is Yahoo really that desperate for filler for their web pages? Maybe downsize instead of publishing this crap.

Maybe they need a less hostile gospel hostile people won't be hostile to? Seriously, who needs religious crap anymore, except the sub-literate?

AL writes down there, "Hussien posted on the Wycliffe USA facebook page on Feb 6 "Praise the Lord" after their statement about further dialogue. Then he calls them liars? Strange." What happened after that statement? Wycliffe gave further details in FAQ and is still full of lies. Hussein was rejoicing probably because he thought Wycliffe was going to acknowledge its part in these mistranslations. Be informed. Please don't use diversionary tactics.

Hussien posted on the Wycliffe USA facebook page on Feb 6 "Praise the Lord" after their statement about further dialogue. Then he calls them liars? Strange. Maybe Biblical Missiology wasn't pleased with that response of his...which is why he felt he had to do a 180. What's the motive here? Fighting to prove "your right" at all cost (regardless of what the facts are)? Or actually trying to encourage meaningful debate. It think the former. Do research from credible sources before believing this guy.

Lots of partial facts in here. This article has a lot of "spin". Great example of yellow journalism.