Bible "versions"

Discussion in 'Biblical Advices' started by idreamofsilence, Jul 27, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. I heard you still have to pay a royalty to the UK royal family along the same lines in England but no where else in the world for the KJV .

    what you're noticing is a reflection of the economy at the time of translation . since the way the nations form themselves is an intimate part of bible prophecy and what God does . there really isn't much you can do about it .. except to pick one of those older translations like the ASV or KJV with no copyright problems related to them and quote those instead .. or as some authors do .. quote interchangeably from a number of translations to avoid the absurd copyright-royalties law .
  2. So your suggestion is for everyone to read something that is like a different language to them?
    I have seen many many people struggle to read KJV and when they are for ever replacing the words like yo thou shalt and so it.
    They tend to miss the point of what God was saying, because they are to busy translating it in their head to the langue they speak.
    Its like studying the bible in a 2nd language to new believers.
    The plain English versions are quite good, so long as you back them with KJV...
  3. I guess I'm chiming in rather late here, and I confess to not having read every post; only a few at the begining and end.:blush:
    I believe Bible version is important, and not necessarily always overriden by the Holy Spirit when an error encountered. That perhaps is I believe because the Bible is not a collection of 'one liners', but must be studied in context.

    A few months ago our home Bible study group was working through Psalm 73,
    one lady was labouring to understand why the writer was being punished each morning. cf Psa 73:14Niv. She uses the Niv:sad01_anim:
    She had visions of this person being beaten each morning before breakfast, and couln't make sense of the whole narrative. When she was invited to look at the same passage and verse in the Nkjv and Kjv, she began to gain a new and refreshed understanding. Is she a Christian? is she Spirit indwelt? check out Romans 14:4 and James 4:12. of course theses don't directly address Bible literacy, however the intent is clear, and I would not want to judge her as being anything other than Christian.
    And what can be said of the translation team who delivered the Niv?
    Consider Deut 22:28-29 in both the Niv and the Nkjv or Kjv; I my self have a hard time accepting the Niv on this matter, but there it is! I coiuld rant on this verse for a couple of pages, but........
    Study is important: Bible version and translation are vitally important, else study becomes a study of error. cf 2Tim 2:15 +/- a few verses. As I said at the begining, the Bible is not a collection of 'one liners' and must be studied in context.

    Off my 'soap box',
  4. Hey Calvin,

    I have a soap box too, and I can spit nails when I find that a greek or hebrew word is simple to understand and then the translators put the wrong word. It bugs me, and makes me wonder what in the world they were thinking. But then I have to sit back down and just chill so that I can continue my study.

    What did you share with the lady that helped her to relax? How did you use the kjv/nkjv to help her? Did you expound on the word of chastise vs punishment or something?
  5. I think it is questionable . and this is just a question . why when people criticize what is missing from a translation .. the gospel isn't mentioned . but the letters usually are? what's up with that?

    except for this one ..

    But that sounds like a divisive statement . guilty by association . does not actually "follow" .

    My suggestion is . if you have a problem with what is missing . say what is missing . illustrate what is missing . and if you notice one a general theme of what is missing . and why that is important to you . also state if this cannot be found anywhere else in the whole bible . just a suggestion .
  6. So,what is questionable?
    I don't have a lot of time for the Niv, but I think at least it must be acknowleged that the foot-notes mention the omissions and hey...the reason is that they are using inferior manuscripts.
    Nuff said?

    blessings calvin
  7. They are using different manuscripts . i think God should be the judge as to whether it is inferior or superior . generally passages such as,

    Jeremiah 8:8

    8 " 'How can you say, "We are wise,
    for we have the law of the LORD,"
    when actually the lying pen of the scribes
    has handled it falsely?

    Seem to illustrate something contrary to a classical view of how to read scripture . furthermore,

    Revelation 22:18-19

    18I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

    but my interlinear shows many textual variations on many of the passages in revelation . i will not let this confuse me .

    There seems to already be problems with the text . this is written in the text . people have already fudged the manuscripts . today there are over 5000 manuscripts . i do not accept the apostolic authority assumed by many today of the protestant reformers . why they tore the apocrypha out of the bible is beyond me .

    this far along in history . as at the beginning . we need to seek God . the Spirit of God to lead us into all truth . as Jesus taught us . and let the text come back to remembrance as we experience His love in our lives daily . moment to moment without end .
  8. Well I pointed out that the more reliable texts used the word 'Chasten/ed' which is more or less interchangeable with 'reprove/ed/reproof/correction'. The Hebrew person that followed the Lord's command was required to study His commandments see

    Joshua 1:6-9 particularly v8:: 'This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. 'Nkjv

    So Asaph (or the character he was portraying) was being chastened by the word of God as he studied it day (and night) and as Paul wrote to Timothy,

    "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2Tim 3:16-17 Nkjv.

    It can be seen then that Asaph was pulled back into line as he studied and meditated on God's word especially in the face of the temptations of his fellow folk who were partying on, and seemed to be rather well off for all their rebellious excess of living.

    Studying on through Psa 73 reveals the psalmist is indeed aware of the personal value of this meditation and susequent relationship with his Lord.
    Well, I said something along those lines.

  9. Westcott and Hort put out a theory on why more than 90% of the evidence on the Greek manuscripts should be thrown out. They noted the manuscripts can be arranged into families and most of them are based on a late revision of the text, which can be discerned by a comparison of documents. They prepared a new Greek text, which went on to become the Critical Text of the NT, upon which all modern translations are based, except the NKJV. They noted that as the manuscripts are reviewed according to their theory, the evidence will arise that confirms their theory.

    It is often taught that the confirming evidence does now exist. However, that is a lie. After about 130 years of additional study, we are still waiting. However, to understand this theory requires a high level of scholarship, and if the theory is confirmed, it would establish biblical scholars as the true spiritual elites of the Christian world.

    Westcott and Hort were part of the Oxford Movement – which advocated reuniting with the Roman Catholic Church. Their attack on the text used by the KJV, the Textus Receptus, (or the Majority Text according to the number of ancient manuscripts), comes against the high prestige this translation always had as the unifying work of all Protestantism and as a confirmation of the Protestant identity. To attack at the KJV in the time of Westcott and Hort was to strike at a foundational stone of all Protestantism. Westcott and Hort worshiped Mary, and they endorsed the theory of evolution. In fact, their chart on why manuscripts should be eliminated has a striking resemblance to Darwin's chart on the evolution of species in chapter four of The Origin of Species – both charts using symbols where evidence was to be discovered and filled in later. They advocated the use of two very old manuscripts as the primary representation of the NT, one preserved by the Vatican. They ignored evidence from the early fathers that the Bible manuscripts were corrupted very early, in upholding the age of a manuscript has higher value than the multiplicity of manuscripts. And they ignored the assessments of two extremely well qualified text critics of their time, that these two manuscripts were among the very worst specimens of copying in existence. They also ignored the fact that the majority text can be established by second century quotations of the church fathers, more than 100 years before W&H held the errant revision occurred that allegedly affected later copying.

    However, just like there are many misrepresentations on the quality of the Critical Text, there are even more misrepresentations on the lack of quality of the Majority Text – such as the character of Erasmus' textual work in putting it together. However, the differences in the texts do not really affect modern translation that much – but the texts are referenced just as a way of degrading the KJV. What does affect the nature of the new versions a lot is a different theory of translation, wherein emphasis is placed on what experts decide a passage means as the basis of how it is stated in English, rather than emphasizing equivalents based primarily just on the original language.

    This could all be a very long discussion, and it always gets emotional. It always ends up being futile. But so much prestige is involved.
  10. I'm so beyond catholic and protestant backbiting . but something you said:

    hasn't this already happened?
  11. I don't know. The truth is elite. So the question is, what is the truth, not who has it. But if you put it that way, someone will bite you.
  12. I believe the question is "who is the truth"

    John 14:6
    Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

    I think it is necessary for some to perhaps amp the perception of "what truth is" an extra dimension from say two dimensional like a shadow to three dimensional like a body . Truth is not a what . but is a living being Jesus Christ . all these schisms, that lead up to the reformation and happened because of the reformation .. James spoke well of them .

    A body dissected . cannot function . but the arm may flinch .. the eye may twitch . but it is just not the same . but when your eye is single . then the whole body will be full of light .

    How this relates to this particular topic is .. it is so divisive . and sometimes i wonder what the point of saying anything is . but as Paul said .. am i now become your enemy because i tell you the truth? and there's that word again .. truth . and i am left with the words of Pilate .. what is truth .. yet Jesus said .. I am the truth . so i'll go with Him .
  13. So are you saying that we should accept the Westcott and Hort NT text, which has become the Critical text of the NT, because the Reformation has caused schisms? I have no doubt Westcott and Hort would agree with you then. However, my opinion is that the W & H theory is deficient, because it lacks proper supporting evidence and it ignores refuting evidence. However, perhaps, you have just moved on to another topic – to criticize the deficiencies of the Reformation. In that case, maybe, you would like to start a new thread. If you have some insight that has been overlooked these last 500 years, I would be willing at least to consider it.
  14. my point is every tradition is guilty of schisms .

    My suggestion is to take all the texts . and apply them .

    Matthew 7:16
    Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

    and work according the premise Jesus taught

    John 7:17
    If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

    God has grounded me in Him in such a way that it doesn't matter what translation is used . because it is always about Him . and He never changes . no matter how much one group may decide to demphasize something they don't like .. or overemphasize another .. God will continue to be the same God He has always been . and in the application of the passages of the bible .. in intimate fellowship with the Holy Spirit .. then we know the truth . because as the body of the head that was first called the truth . we too become the only bible that some people will ever read .



    John 8:32
    And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
  15. So man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, Matthew 4:4, but the precise nature of those words just are not important at all. The words of God are pure, as silver tried in a furnace, purified seven times, and God will preserve them forever, Psalm 12:6,7, but we do not have to worry about the details on exactly what is said or how it is said. And we know that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, II Peter 1:20,21, but it doesn't matter what translation is used because Christ does not change even if God's words do. The word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword, Hebrews 4:12, and under emphasizing what it says through a translation will not stop the Holy Spirit from having us know what it actually says in truth.

    In other words, it seems you are saying.... if we are intimate with Christ, we can be confident that whatever we perceive as truth from God actually is truth from God, and we do not have to waste time with checking our understanding with Scripture.

    Well, none of this above approach is how I do it. However, I am intimate with the Holy Spirit.

    And thus, I do not agree with the Jehovah Witnesses who told “Idreamofsilence” that he (or is it she) can only find flawed answers in the KJV or NKJV, or that translations based on the Westcott and Hort text are superior because of their level of scholarship. I do not think the Word of God is something to be played with – but from my view point, that is exactly what Westcott and Hort did.
  16. I don't even care about the Erasmus or Wescott Hort compilations . just give a book with the various variations from the different manuscripts . if i need to check the KJV source i have an interlinear for that .

    It's not an either or approach . i am proposing an alternate approach .

    1 Thessalonians 5:19-22 (New International Version)

    19Do not put out the Spirit's fire; 20do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21Test everything. Hold on to the good. 22Avoid every kind of evil.

    1 Thessalonians 5:19-22 (King James Version)

    19Quench not the Spirit.
    20Despise not prophesyings.
    21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
    22Abstain from all appearance of evil.

    To take the words as the very words of God regardless of translation . and test them . if they are of God then they will produce the fruit the scripture specifies .. if not . then not . keep what does bear fruit . and toss what doesn't . a three year period usually settles most matters and leave others inconclusive at which point you just keep waiting to see what kind of fruit it bears . but the truth is in the application . for wisdom is justified by her children .

    if someone says they found fruit where i didn't .. i have a tendency to try it out again intensively for a while .. just to see .. hey .. maybe my heart .. the field has changed .. and fruit will bear now .. and if not .. hmm .. interesting ..

    when reading a book that is supposedly from God to us .. one must think .. well if the text says this is supposed to happen .. i should be asking God .. why it isn't .. if it isn't . and if He tells me to wait .. then i wait .

    i assume the text is true .. and apply accordingly . and if there is anything else that isn't clear to me .. the Spirit of God .. will make that to clear to me also .

    This proposed journey is real to me . and has profound consequences on my inner being . i do not take it lightly . i say that because .. there was i time i would read what i have written and think that of myself . but this is not the case . far from it . God knows .
  17. Michael,

    When you brought up the issue of “schisms,” I think that was something very important to you. However, my impression is, that you have a different concept of it than I do. I am Protestant – and we view unity as spiritual, not institutional, and we do not view disagreement as schism, on matters outside of core doctrine. (However, I do not refer to how the Reformation began, but how it developed). So, maybe, some time in the future we should look at that in the forum.

    You noted that you have an intimate relationship with the Holy Spirit. I do also. However, I also have an intimate relationship with the Bible – and I wish other Christians would pursue such intimacy as well. The civil rights that we enjoy in America really began because people wanted to translate the Bible into English – the Bible has that kind of power. Those who had Bibles were hunted down and killed, but nothing would stop them from having the Word of God. The first and most basic right of an Englishman was the right to own a Bible. They wanted everything in life and all society to be based on it. Despite the mistakes these early Protestants may have made, so much can be learned from them on the true value of the Bible. Indeed, we should protect our right to the Bible with our lives. Hmmm... there is so much that could be said on the value of the Bible.
  18. I appreciate that . from what i understand Erasmus didn't even have access to an entire manuscript . and now we have so many . i think in the spirit of translating the bible into english and what it did . perhaps if someone other than W and H were to take the manuscripts we currently have and to compile something more comprehensive and exhaustive for translators to use . maybe that would be an acceptable solution .

    but that being said . i really love the King James version . most of my memory work is done in it . and a lot of Christ positive application found from it also . i know the power the bible has . it is responsible for restoring my scattered and shattered mind . it taught me how to think all over again . awesome power there is in the bible .

    i was just looking to the future . if God has provided us with all these manuscripts .. perhaps we should do something constructive with them . is my suggestion .

    and i wouldn't mind speaking of the schisms with you on another thread . i would imagine that to be a constructive and edifying conversation .
  19. Michael,

    I have already indicated there is a lot of dishonesty regarding Erasmus. However, in fact there is a lot of dishonesty in how the NT text is represented period. I don't know what good it would do to go over all the issues now. However, keep in mind, that the text Erasmus established is essentially consistent with the majority text, with most of the differences being merely trivial. Where Erasmus deviated from the majority text in a manner of substance, he had his reasons – and it is possible to review his notes in detail. I have, and they amaze me. Scholars say his textual work was inferior as he had no knowledge of textual families. However, as I said before, after 130 of study on this theory of families, we are still waiting for the evidence that proves it. I think it is all a sham. If you seek out the actual facts, you will find Erasmus had a much, much greater knowledge of the manuscripts than supporters of the Critical Text admit. Let me give you just one example – CT supporters say Erasmus did not have access to Vaticannus B, which is W&H's main manuscript. That simply is not true – a person with access to Vaticannus B wrote to him extensively on the details of the manuscript, but Erasmus rejected the readings from this manuscript that differed with the MT. I could go on and on with all the details that have been misrepresented about Erasmus. And incidentally, if you get a chance to read any of his other spiritual works, do it – as they are timeless and rich.

    And I agree, the KJV has a powerful anointing. Reading it can make me drunk. No other version does that to me.
  20. Luke 5:39

    No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

    I don't really care which manuscripts each group had access to . i just want to assess it for myself . why should i trust men to translate for me ? though the old seems better the promise of God is sure ..

    John 2:10

    10And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.

    Another issue which is commonly disregarded is:

    1 Corinthians 14

    1Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. 2For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. 3But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. 4He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.

    Unless you live in an isolated village in the UK that still uses this particular dialect of english . The king james version is not in the vernacular . so it is parting from biblical tradition that way . because it is written in a language that is 1) archaic 2) has definitions for english words that are still in use .. but the definition is actually different today .. 3) because it is not a gospel children can possess .

    To force people to read the KJV is just missing the point . there needs to be new translations so the message of God can be spoken to people in their own language .

    Note: i take objection only to your exclusivism in this matter . not the KJV itself .
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page