Has the Bible Been Corrupted or Mistranslated? (Part 2 of 2)

[@TheAntiburglar]

It's always great to get access to real scholarship in the face of blatant falsehoods, deliberate misrepresentations, and vast oversimplifications on the part of apologetic dogma. Thanks Dr Dan! :D

[@christahewitt2758]

“Protect the dogmas that prop up texts that they find authoritative” ….perfectly said Dan.

[@firstpersonwinner7404]

I used to believe all tbese apologetic arguments when I was younger until I startwd to have too many questions they couldbt answer. That is when I discovered that apologetics largely is a smokescreen of misinformation to keep people from truly engaging with those questions in the first place. I really appreciate the work that scholars like Dan do in providing a better understanding of scripture to a unschooled audience. It is really needed in the church as well as non believing communities.

[@jackaltwinky77]

This may have been the most angered I have ever heard Dan speak, and it makes me appreciate his work even more. How calmly he breaks down the problems with the apologetics arguments, and the wildly misleading things that get said by them.

[@bristolrovers27]

As we approached the end of part 2, I was beginning to feel sorry for the apologist. His arguments fall flat and Dan wipes the floor with him.

[@benjaminlesue1372]

"That's was apologetics does . . . it tries to protect the dogmas that prop up the tradition that they find authoritative." Another truth bomb from Dan!

[@ignaciogrial1872]

literally destroyed sola scriptura and Christian denominations

[@f4rnsworth138]

Dan thank you for all you do. I was raised much like this creator and would've made many of the same assertions as this person, and for the same reasons. I was only ever trying to protect the dogma I was raised with and believed in

[@theoutspokenhumanist]

Another example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. A KZbin creator who is clearly not a biblical scholar, boldly proclaiming his ill-informed opinions as if they are facts. The sad part is that he is not alone in his error. In addition to many like him, there are people out there who are so desperate to justify or bolster their faith that they cling to such information through confirmation bias without ever fact checking it. Thank goodness for Dan and others like him who calmly educate and inform.

[@jaclo3112]

Unfortunatly the christian male is merely spouting what other christian apologists and preachers say. I've been to too many services where priests have preached exactly what this guy has spouted. I've seen many KZbin videos of preachers and apologists spout this. This kid is just mimicking what he has been told without doing any research and verification for himself.

[@chrisbornman5460]

Sad that it usually lands with their escapism ideology. If Christ was real to them, why is it all about them?

[@theoutspokenhumanist]

@@chrisbornman5460 A good point. Of course, one of the features of all religious belief is the solipsism and the subsequent elitism that accompanies it. 'The whole universe was made by God for us and we alone will be saved because only we know what God wants. Our religion is true and yours is false and how dare you worship the same god as us in a different way.' It's all childish nonsense but it's dangerous too.

[@emptyhand777]

Strong ending to this video. Really something to think about.

[@danielcobia7818]

Speaking off the cuff: I think most people that only speak or understand one language underestimate the difficulties of translation. My eyes were opened quite a bit when I learned Portuguese and lived in Brazil for a while. Literal translations are often not an accurate representation of what the originator was trying to convey. There's a great deal that comes from connotation and an understanding of local vernacular that's used that can make a huge difference in how something is translated. Fun story time that sticks out in my mind: One phrase that I learned in Brazil was "mão de vaca" now if you were to translate that literally to English you'd say "Hand of cow". Well goodness, what does that mean? Cows don't have hands. Or does that mean hoof? Turns out the sentiment as it's intended is how we'd phrase it in the U.S. of a person that's a "Scrooge" or a "Tightwad". The imagery is that the persons hand is wound so tight around their cash that it's more like a hoof than a hand.

[@tonycook7679]

So true, some words simply can't be translated. My son got a "star" for enthusiasm at school. His mum asked me what that did that mean in ភាសាខ្មែរ, her native language. I had to confess that there is no word that means enthusiasm in the sense that we mean it in her language. There are words to describe enthusiasm as in "desire to make love" and other allied meanings, but nothing equivalent to simple enthusiasm. There are innumerable words that are not translatable because they talk about things that have on equivalence in Cambodian culture. I can know these things because Khmair is a living language, how you can imagine to know what any particular word meant when talking about abstract things like "love" or "passion" or whatever when written by some primitive middle eastern cult members 2000 years ago. Forget it, I would rather believe King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table than the bible as it has been invented.

[@jcash0904]

Keep in mind we were warned to not speak if we didn't know what we were saying. Our language is a creation of the devil. We speak evil in ignorance without consideration. So many of our words mean something totally different than our supplied definition. Just for reference and please dont say it nick el odeon is a word that long ago meant that you dont believe in God. So many kids sang that all through childhood. I dont see anyone getting a pass on judgment day with a defense strategy based on poor translation. Its also not going to fly when that he is the reason for the season nonsense hits front stage.

[@davidball549]

A good example of this are idioms. As a Brit, I grew up with British English ones and a direct translation into another language wouldn't make any sense.

[@danielcobia7818]

@@davidball549 Care to share any that stick out in your mind to the rest of the class?

[@davidball549]

@@danielcobia7818 Yeah, I would..... Box clever The cat's whiskers, Over the moon There's three for you. I daresay the actual words can be translated into other languages but the meaning of each idiom lies outside the literal word-for-word meaning of the phrase.

[@wfd2012]

Any question of what the Bible says has to on some level rely on tradition because the Bible itself is the product of tradition. The Bible itself doesn't say what books are or are not part of the Bible. Any reference to the Bible as a concrete collection of books is already an appeal to a tradition that chose to combine those books while excluding other books.

[@ritawing1064]

"Helping Jesus Fullfill Prophecy", by Robert Miller goes very thoroughly into this question.

[@QuinnPrice]

Thanks, Dan for bringing data into dogmatic assertions.

[@BradyPostma]

The bit about the New Testament citing the fulfillment of the Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible instead of fulfilling the Hebrew text is very interesting.

[@razorbeard6970]

That bit has been known for awhile and is something Christians don't like to admit. They will adhere to the Septuagint being excellent and not question the application of potentially misunderstood passages that led to the Gospel renderings of prophecy that could be inaccurate. The Septuagint does have good qualities but, this is one of the significant bad ones.

[@BradyPostma]

@@razorbeard6970 I'm sure it was already known to scholars, but it was news to me.

[@QuinnPrice]

Apologist: "I never let the data stand in the way of a good story."

[@Carblesnarky]

Fun fact the Septuagint is still the canonical text of the Hebrew scriptures for a good sized portion of the Orthodox tradition. Also on the Dead Sea scrolls, both the Great Psalms Scroll and the Septuagint has Psalm 151. The Masoretic text doesn't contain it.

[@squiddwizzard8850]

Orthodox Christianity I assume?

[@Carblesnarky]

@@squiddwizzard8850 Yeah or Eastern Orthodox if you prefer.

[@BradyPostma]

It's just that there's an Orthodox Jewish tradition, too. It's important to distinguish in this context.

[@pansepot1490]

Another fun fact is that there isn’t THE Septuagint. The first Greek translation was produced in Alexandria sometime in the first centuries BCE and given that name but eventually it suffered all the problems that copying text by hand has. Meaning that there’s textual variation among the Greek manuscripts that we know as Septuagint. If I remember correctly rabbi Tovia Singer says that Greek translations produced centuries later used the title Septuagint for authoritative purposes, thus adding to the confusion.

[@mahkaimaldonado4471]

as a christian i definitely appreciate everything you do!! not saying i agree with everything you say ofc, but i see that you’re genuine and very thoughtful

[@chrisbornman5460]

Thank you Dan, for your honesty and sharing your knowledge and truth with us. Wish more people didn't look to prove their desperation by creating dogma that is false, but really were interested in the truth

[@minaguta4147]

Nothing better than Dr. Dan meticulously deconstructing and exposing what is really going on in these misleading apologetic videos: protecting the dogmas that prop up the tradition they find authoritative. 🔥🔥🔥

[@michaelh3470]

Thank you for the video. I love the content.

[@kvjackal7980]

We're all so blessed to have your help, Doc Dan. We appreciate you. Thank you! ♥️

[@BazNard]

Superb as always.

[@ranilodicen4460]

wow! we need more of this

[@Zahaqiel]

It is worth bringing up that "translations of translations" is kinda relevant for the KJV. Given that there is an active and... very dogmatic... faction of people who _only_ accept the KJV, and the fact that there are parts of the New Testament in the KJV that do not correspond to any Greek text but rather they are taken from the Bishop's Bible (and thus from the Latin Vulgate, making the pathway Greek -> Latin -> English), arguably while it's not relevant to modern translations it's still relevant for modern readers.

[@fnjesusfreak]

Also, I'm not aware of any Portuguese translations that aren't cross-translations (be it Latin, Spanish or English as the Vorlage).

[@corlissmedia2.0]

Beautiful summary at the end of this powerful refutation of an apologist's view of the Bible. Thank you!

[@kauko15]

Regarding Jeremiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls: my understanding has always been that the DSS contain multiple Jeremiah texts, some of which correspond more to LXX Jeremiah and some to the Masoretic text.

[@user-vo4wc2jz8g]

I used to use all the same arguments that Christian was using, basically perpetuating mistruths with very little actual knowledge on the subject

[@Tmanaz480]

Ouch...creator remids me of myself at that age. Apologists were my first exposure to the bible.

[@squiddwizzard8850]

This sort of makes me realize.. I am actually OK with some of this 'corruption' as long as it's done in good faith. Just add a footnote indicating it's not original or something. The woman caught in adultery, and Jesus saying 'let he who is without sin' is just objectively a good lesson. The point of faith and religion isn't accurate historicity it's..ethics, in a lot of ways. That story it's good, snd important, snd it's not a clobber passage. Snd i think preserving thst is important. Again, provided it is done so honestly, with the idea not only that it should be noted as not original but why it's being left in "This passage is not original to the text, however it is valuable to the Christian tradition as a whole, and to the concept of mercy; the big picture goal of the the faith" or something.

[@SuperMrAndersen]

So, Christianity is based on fake stories and conclusions? We can create better dogmas. Then why bother until you are a scholar?

[@squiddwizzard8850]

@@SuperMrAndersen the Bible has always been edited over time.

[@MichaelWalker-de8nf]

Dan, you the man 🤘❤

[@Leoji67]

What are your views on Joseph Smith's translation of the Bible?

[@sonnydanielj7508]

Very educational.

[@ClarkVangilder]

Can you recommend some reading on the topic of this mismatch between original Hebrew and the Septuagint as it influenced the NT? I think I've watched a bit of that with you and others (Kipp etc.), but is there more of that kind of resource that you can recommend? On that note, I would request that you start a series on this very thing with the Diabolocritics group and whoever else you think can help exposit these kinds of details.

[@jimmythompson1979]

Why are these apologist so confident when making up these lies?

[@jenna2431]

Because the Frank Tureks, James Warner Wallace's, Lee Stroebels, and William Lane Craigs of the world have taught them to.

[@fnjesusfreak]

Dunning-Kruger

[@Chalisque]

To give a telephone analogy, no matter how the signal is sent within the network, eventually it comes down to the final few hundred meters of wire to your house. If that wire is compromised, the whole signal is compromised. Likewise, if the path meanings take from scripture into your mind are a source of errors, then no matter whether or not things have been corrupted by the time they arrive in front of you as ink on paper, by the time it has be translated into meaning in your mind, it has been corrupted. And nobody is perfect. Thus received meaning is always corrupted to some degree, so we should assume that our understanding is always flawed, no matter to where we attribute those flaws.

[@candyfromtexas6855]

❤❤❤

[@scottmaddow7879]

Best answer ever.

[@kauanamaral1654]

Dan é verdade que se alinharmos os 4 evangelhos pela linha histórica , a idade de Jesus seria de 42 anos ?

[@mattmiller9809]

If someone was truly a Fundamentalist, then they'd simply remove those passages that were added from the NT and Hebrew Bible. Or they'd demand clear mentioning that a given passage was added and not found in original manuscripts. If someone is a more liberal minded individual they could justify doing the 2nd option since these passages could be justified as being good stories even if they aren't authoritative in the same way scripture is. I find utility out of the Gnostic texts and the deuterocanonical texts and the stories of Isa from the Quran. I find value from the Gospel texts generally even tho I'm an Atheist and I think generally the texts are propped up upon legendary material. Liberal Christians could do similarly.

[@georgekobler77]

I wonder, do any of the creators of the videos to which you react, respond to your reaction?

[@sicpuppy9435]

According to Herman C. Hoskier, there are, without counting errors of iotacism, 3,036 textual variations between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in the text of the Gospels alone, enumerated as follows: Matthew: 656, Mark: 567, Luke: 791, John: 1022 The text of Codex Sinaiticus differs in numerous instances from that of the authorized version of the Bible For example, the resurrection narrative at the end of Mark (16:9-20) is absent from the Codex Sinaiticus. So is the conclusion of the Lord’s Prayer: “For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen” (Matthew 6:13). The woman caught in adultery from John 8 is omitted in Codex Sinaiticus. Textual variants in the New Testament are the subject of the study called textual criticism of the New Testament. Textual variants in manuscripts arise when a copyist makes deliberate alterations to a text that is being reproduced. The most recent estimate puts the number of non-spelling variants among New Testament manuscripts around 500,000.?

[@edwardmiessner6502]

So which version do the Biblical Qumran Scrolls other than Jeremiah come closer to? The Tanakh (Masoretic) or the Old Testament (Septuagint)?

[@_volder]

Where can we see a list or some examples of what the changes were?

[@vmonk2]

Bart Ehrman’s books and videos. I think he has some lectures on this subject on KZbin

[@matthewmurdoch6932]

So do we have Hebrew texts for the Old Testament that are universally older than the Septuigant texts?

[@VulcanLogic]

I was watching this documentary called "History of the World Part I" and it showed that originally, there were 15 commandments but Moses accidentally dropped and broke one of the three tablets and so we only have the 10 commandments today.

[@pansepot1490]

I heard that god originally intended to give Moses only 3 commandments but Moses haggled very hard and eventually got 10. 😅

[@SteveMcGuiremail]

I am confused with the issue Dan mentions with John 4:5. It simply reads: "So he came to a Samaritan city called Sychar, near the plot of ground that Jacob had given to his son Joseph."

[@svezhiepyatki]

I think he meant John 5:4.

[@SteveMcGuiremail]

@@svezhiepyatki Thanks. I am sure you are correct. I appreciate your quick answer.

[@billcook4768]

Random question: If we believe there were source documents for the gospels, such as the Q document, do we believe they were written in Greek? Aramaic? Hebrew?

[@rainbowkrampus]

NT is Greek start to finish. Paul is our earliest source and he's writing in Greek. The gospels are borrowing from Greek plays like the works of Homer which are also Greek. Personally I think Q is bs but were it to exist along with other sayings gospels that popped up here and there, it too would be Greek.

[@ramadadiver8112]

In the ,1800 s the oldest manuscripts of the old testament were in greek until we found the dead sea Scrolls . Yet no one assumed the originals were greek

[@howlrichard1028]

​@@ramadadiver8112Because the old testament was written at a time and place where Greek wasn't common.

[@ImDengler]

I watch your tiktok but I'm not sure if you read youtube comments. Why is it that you think the short ending of Mark may be a change?

[@AurorXZ]

From what I recall, the abrupt ending fits an intentional thematic inversion-people are commanded to stay quiet, but they announce; the women are told to announce, but they stay quiet. In this, the _audience_ may be the intended one to "spread the word." However, the short ending is so strikingly abrupt and (for many) counterintuitive that they think the ending may have been lost/damaged early on. The abruptness (combined with a lack of Jesus' appearance) appears to have caused so much discomfort among scribes that they added/merged traditions to the end, in an attempt to give it the expected conclusion.

[@reggie2337]

As usual, a nuanced, polite and well delivered scholarly response, thank you for sharing your knowledge @maklelan. As a classic example of a verse that isn't present in the oldest MSS witnesses, I think you meant John 5:4 (the angel at the pool of Bethesda) rather than John 4:5 (Jesus at the well at Sychar with the Samaritan woman), though. Inverting chapter and verse is easily done, even by tbe best! 😉

[@BethDiane]

Traduttore tradittore. A common Italian saying: a translator is a traitor.

[@lde-m8688]

Do people also not understand that word meanings change as do connotations of words.

[@noahloveschrist_]

Can we still trust the bible?

[@obiwankenobi2520]

According to some, anything added to the Bible at a later time must have been divinely inspired. I think it’s just an excuse

[@mickeydecurious]

IDK I think believing in Father God is enough🙇🏼

[@diogeneslamp8004]

How do you decide what Father Good wants from you?

[@henryjordan9453]

As a messianic Jew I want the original text not what the church says is the text 0:08

[@rimmersbryggeri]

Did he say "Let's be honest"? Now that's irony.

[@diogeneslamp8004]

He forgot “…and informed.”

[@rimmersbryggeri]

@@diogeneslamp8004 That's a big word.

[@diogeneslamp8004]

@@rimmersbryggeri Indeed. Carries a lot of responsibility and requires much effort.

[@rimmersbryggeri]

@@diogeneslamp8004 Also it's 4 syllables.

[@diogeneslamp8004]

@@rimmersbryggeri Which one is four syllables?

[@DKWalser]

Allow me to disagree on one point with our handsome host. At one point in the video he's responding to, the creator says there's no such thing as translations layered upon translations (paraphrasing). Dan then cuts in to say that the creator is correct. Yes and no. It depends on what we mean by 'translation'. Colloquially, many refer to the KJV as a new translation of the bible. In fact, those involved with producing the work referred to themselves as 'The Translators'. But, of course, in a strict sense, it wasn't a new translation but a revision of an earlier translation (the Bishop's Bible), which borrowed a lot from prior English translations, including the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, and the Tyndale Bible. You don't 'translate' something in English into English. However, that's not what critics of the inerrancy of the bible mean when they say it suffers from layers of translations. They are referring to the process that gave us the KJV (and other versions that are largely based on the KJV). The KJV was, and is, referred to as a distinct 'translation', yet it was largely a revision of a prior English version of the bible that was itself, largely, a revision of other prior English versions. The errors made in those prior versions are, for the most part, in the KJV. The translators of the KJV introduced their own errors. And, many of these errors are found in more modern English translations (or, if you'd prefer, revisions). This is what's meant by layer upon layer of translations. Pointing out that these weren't really translations, but were revisions, doesn't address the criticism.

[@BazNard]

Who is he?

[@clearstonewindows]

I think what people have a hard time with is the way God speaks to his children. They want zero personal responsibility for how to study and learn and feel so much safer in a world of tradition. This is why they hated Jesus and why people in their own land can never accept a prophet.

[@larryrollyson3344]

Revelation 13 13 , 1455 days will be fullfilled. Wormwood is coming.

[@20quid]

Nope.

[@larryrollyson3344]

@@20quid guess you not aware what all has happened, mark of the beast, the wine for the winepress has ben served, the wedding supper to the Lamb, alot has happened the world does not know. As in the days of Noah. Yet we are in the days of vengeance when all things written must be done.

[@larryrollyson3344]

@@20quid nope 😂 that is all you got and I know it. Denial of the truth.

[@kennethhymes9734]

Anyone with an interest really should read the work of Richard Carrier. Getting outside the old and unproductive arguments is important. It is crucial to place these texts and the claims about them in the context of myriad similar and analogous claims made in other times, places and cultures. There is a pervasive exceptionalism and insularity in bible studies which deliberately avoid perspective and proper scale of view. The christian ideology is just a notably successful cousin of hundreds of mystery cults, large numbers contemporary with and preceding its formation. The mix of Egyptian theology, greek philosophy and post-occupation messianic Joshua-baiting is just obvious when you know it is there, and is far more explanatory when it comes to all the many details and contradictions and plausible tales, than any of the standard models which bafflingly hold sway even among non christian historians of religion. Fear of being the first penguin in the water is my read of it, based on conversations with a top historian at Columbia, an atheist who believes the most remarkable things about jesus and buddha. The denial is weird and exhausting if you start paying attention to the dynamic,

[@andrebrown8969]

A text that comes from a being, as God is described, should not need desperate ill informed people trying to defend its authenticity.

[@ramadadiver8112]

There is nowhere in the Bible that says the biblical texts comes from God

[@andrebrown8969]

@@ramadadiver8112 You kidding?

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@andrebrown8969 nope . Just because a Christian ( or atheist ) makes a claim about what the Bible says . Does not mean the Bible actually says that The Bible is Not the Qur'an

[@andrebrown8969]

@@ramadadiver8112 So the bible is one big lie then, people just made all of it up, it is not the word of any god. (which we already knew, and to be honest all religious texts are).

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@andrebrown8969 how is the Bible a lie when the Bible never claims it

[@pleaseenteraname1103]

Why do you make more videos but the New Testament in the Old Testament? Because the Hebrew Bible is more of your turf.

[@RustyJoe]

Well I can see the attraction of Abrahamic religions with such clear messaging leading the way to salvation 😏

[@ramadadiver8112]

Aristophanes, 451-383BC, there are 10 copies from 900AD, a span of 1,300 years. Sophocles, a playwright, wrote Oedipus trilogy 496-406BC, his earliest copy is 1000 AD, a time span of 1,400 years and there are 193 copies. 9-10 good copies of Caesar's gallic Wars originally written anywhere from 100-44BC. 7 copies of Plato dated around 1000 years after its original authorship of about 427-327BC. 20 copies of Livy's Roman History, dated about 1,200 years after it was originally written in 59BC-17AD 2 copies of Tacitus' Annals written in 100 AD; copies we have are from 1,000 years after, 8 copies of Thucydides' History originally written in 460-400 BC; copies we have are from 1,300 years after. 9 copies from Euripedes originally written in 480-406 BC; copies are from 1500 years after. 5 copies Aristotle originally written in 384-322 BC; copies we have are from 1,400 years after. The most documented secular work from the ancient world is Homers Illiad -- surviving on 643 manuscript copies.

[@hairiestwizard]

What point are you trying to make here?

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@hairiestwizard Even if we take the latest complete new testament manuscripts which are later . They are superior than a lot of other writings when it comes to the time frame between the original composition and our.earliest manuscript . To complain about the new testament time span between the originals and the copies . Is to treat the new testament with a double standard

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@hairiestwizard aka special pleading

[@Zahaqiel]

@@ramadadiver8112 Can you find us someone trying to claim that these are unaltered from their originals and we should dismiss all inquiry into their original forms? Can you find anyone trying to claim that the accounts recorded in any of these works are absolutely true? Can you find anyone trying to claim that these are the perfect works of God itself?

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@Zahaqiel the only reason there is differences is because of the vast amount of manuscripts . If you have only one manuscript you have no idea that it's been changed .

[@boboak9168]

This video highlights how problematic ancient transmission of knowledge by writing was. Still, humans needed the written word because they forgot, could only be in one place at a time, and died losing all their knowledge, etc. The God Abrahamic religions propose is not subject to ANY of these limitations. This God would have absolutely ZERO need for this massively flawed technology, nor the human middlemen. Abrahamic religions are an obvious con.

[@ramadadiver8112]

Short ending and long ending of mark makes no differnce . The short verion already assumes jesus will appear in gallalee to his disciples . So in the gospel of mark . You actually AVE two different authors that support that jesus was raised and appeared to the disciples. Btw the greek septuigent is just as old as the dead sea scrolls

[@kalords5967]

So, let me see you drink poison, handling poisonous snakes, laying hands on the cancer patients and heal them, and speaking in tongues 😅😅😅😅

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@kalords5967 what has that got to do with the long version and short version of mark ?

[@jaclo3112]

@ramadadiver8112 they are both texts that aren't in earlier manuscripts. If the long ending of mark is a valid change, than so too is the verse saying christians will be able to handle snakes, drink poison etc.

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@jaclo3112 that's not my point . I said it doesn't matter if you accept the long version or short version . Because the main reason people bring this up is for the resurection apparences . If you accept the short version ..you actually have two sources not one and therefore have a stronger case for Jesus resurection

[@ramadadiver8112]

@@jaclo3112 it's actually better for Chrsitians to accept that the long version was not part of mark . It helps them not undermine them Btw the long version is quoted by church fathers before the manuscripts that have the short version

[@brettmajeske3525]

What no comments? Am i first to respond?

[@alanb8884]

You did it chum!

[@billcook4768]

All the evidence we have points to you being first. But there could be other posts, earlier posts, that are lost to history.

[@xarchist]

Are Bible translators apologists?

[@huttj509]

some are, many are not, lots of committees...

[@rainbowkrampus]

Depends on what you mean by apologist and who you're talking about. The people responsible for most of the Bible's floating around are believers and they are relying to one extent or another on traditions. In the sense that they are then putting out these texts as products of their traditions, then you could argue that they are apologists, intentionally or not. But there are other translations which have other goals, like that weird one that translates everything literally. Then there are the scholars who do their own translating. They're necessarily bringing some bias into the process. But the difference is that they aren't biased in favor of a particular tradition so much as they are biased towards trying to get as accurate of an understanding of the author's intent as possible. If you use a more strict definition, are any of these people going around and creating arguments to legitimize their beliefs and traditions to fellow believers? Maybe. But you'd need to demonstrate that on a case by case basis.

[@20quid]

If you mean have any translators chosen to word their translation in a particular way to affirm their own doctrine or dogma? Yes. The King James Bible chose to translate the word "ekklesia" as "church" instead of "aseembly" or "congregation" in order to affirm the authority of the established church structure over a more grassroots approach to worship.