Wrong =!= False.
IMPLIES =!= SAME
I stated wrong IMPLIES false (which it most often does in matters of accuracy, which is what we are talking about)
However, in this amazing English language, they are synonyms which such similar definitions I could claim they are equivalent in this context:
Wrong - deviating from truth or fact; erroneous (
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/wrong #2)
False - not true or correct; erroneous (
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/false #1)
I think you need to stop looking so hard for a reason to disagree with the title of the thread.
I am not looking very hard and was quite polite with my request. The title of this thread is unnecessarily inflammatory. We could have quite a good discussion on Bible translations and linguistics, but the title of this thread (in the English language as we use it) carries a good deal of hostile connotation - even if its denotation is passably docile.
You can take the stance that when you say "the Bible is wrong" you are implying "the English translation of the Bible contains an unknown (possibly large) number of errors that may even effect core doctrines derived from it"... but why not then just state what you mean so it is clearer for anyone looking through the forums that sees it. What about the Bible's mistranslation bothers you? Are you worried that Christian fundamental Bible literalists are using these mistranslations to justify morally reprehensible actions? Are you concerned for them that their beliefs are misplaced because of the mistranslations? Why did you post this in the first place? I guess these are all questions I'd like to hear answers too even if you won't change the title.
I'd also point out that the man isn't arguing against Biblical literalism. While he points out problems with the translation he is also very clear that the Bible, mistranslated though it may be, still contains very important concepts that need not be "interpreted" or thought of as metaphors to be applied even in the modern day. He makes a very good point about the value of absolute moral standards found in the ten commandments: they aren't guidelines or suggestions as more liberal interpretations of the Bible are open to, they are moral law.
And from a purely intellectual standpoint, that something contains 100 errors makes no case that it doesn't also contain 1000 truths. It does mean that cross-referncing and personal research are necessary to discern what is correct and to correct that which is not. There is nothing wrong with taking it literally unless "literally" means "as written AND without thought" (which it does not). What I really got from the video is that we need people with that kind of dedication and research to retranslate as much of the Bible as possible using all the linguistic breakthroughs of the past 300 years.
