Bible "versions"

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

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Michael,

    You've changed what I said!!! But that always happens. One thing that the advocates of the modern translations do is – that if someone upholds the KJV as the best translation in English, they change this position to KJV only. I think they do that to get away from having to defend the quality of the modern versions. Also, it is not difficult at all to make a person look ridiculous, who upholds the KJV as the equivalent of the inspired word of God, and then, setting out the defense of the modern versions is not necessary. It is all gimmicks, gimmicks, gimmicks. In your case, I hope the misrepresentation of my position was merely a misreading of my posts.

    I do not consider your wine biblical passages applicable to what I have been discussing. The truth is, God set out one text, not many texts, and we should try to establish what the text is to the best of our ability, because it represents the truth on what is the Word of God. We should make every effort to set aside bias, or substitute standards for the way to read God's word, and we should make every effort to look at the evidence thoroughly and objectively.

    I do not consider your quoted prophecy text as being applicable. I Thessalonians 5:21 notes we should test prophecy. We do that by comparing these personal prophecies to Scripture. We do not establish Scripture by comparing it to our personal prophecies. I Corinthians 14:3 notes that the purpose of NT prophecy is for edification, exhortation, and comfort, and its purpose is not to establish what is the text of the Bible.

    The KJV is written in Tudor English (yes, I know it was published in 1611, but due to the influence of Tyndale, it was the language of the 1540s). It very interesting the character of Tudor English, I think, because it is the closest reflection in English of the character of the Hebrew language. Hebrew employs fast, open syllables and uses simple and basic words. Tudor English in like manner is fast and more closely resembles open syllables (although the English language itself prefers closed syllables), and the expression of that time relied on simple, basic words for all communication. So Tudor English is archaic; yet, the Bible is even more archaic in language and expression. Thus, what style of English can better represent it and convey the spiritual essence of its expression?

    People say the KJV is difficult. I agree. The only other Bible I find more difficult in expression is the original text. The truth is, reading the text in the original language is often difficult, because the language is so archaic. Even using the original text, I often have to struggle for many days to arrive at what I believe is being said. However, the KJV translators put an emphasis on language equivalents, not meaning equivalents – thus, they preserved the difficult texts in a similar form. But what is more honest – to leave difficult passages for what they are, or to change the language to reflect a simplified meaning as determined by experts according to their personal assumptions, which is most often left disguised, and which just ignores the question of how good they were at guessing?

    However, some of the KJV language actually cannot be understood due to the words having changed meaning due to age. The Sword Bible edition of the KJV notes all those changes – so it is a simple matter to deal with.

    The problem with making a new translation is, that people simply do not understand what is involved in bringing about an anointing on the work. Modern biblical scholars are not necessarily spiritual men. The KJV version was actually a work over a long period of time by many people, not just the KJV translators. The Holy Spirit became involved in that process. In the 1880s, the church in England tried to continue that process, by calling for a committee to review the KJV and make the minimal changes necessary to bring the language up to date. However, the committee was too elite for the objective. Instead, they created a new Greek text and made changes according to the dictates of their brilliant minds.
  2. It was a misreading of your posts . sorry .

    regarding archaisms i just read what the strongs number says beside the words and use that definition myself .

    but another thought came to me today . (aside from the 1880s ASV prototype) everyone talks about the 1611 translation . but the ones we buy in stores were completed (or dated) in the latter half of the 18th century . what's your take on that?
  3. These changes are trivial, mostly dealing with more modern spelling.
  4. Interesting and good to know . i think .. after all this . that the true test of any translation is examining the spiritual lives of those who apply it . even according to the translation that they are using .

    does this translation produce disciples of Jesus .. children of God?


    does this translation produce disciples of the pharisees .. twice the child of hell?

    a sobering thought . and a question i also consider . when looking at a translation .

    that being said . it seems the heart that reads and interprets . seems to be more of importance in this case .. than the translation itself .
  5. No one ever leaves out subjective considerations.
  6. Not subjective . if the word is a seed as Jesus said . then the fruit that comes from it .. is important to observe .
  7. You mean I have to accept all those assessments about me, that I am possessed by a demon?
  8. Hmm how so? i wasn't judging any translation . i was stating the manner in which i assess their quality . i would be indicting myself also as earlier i said "i love the king james version" and stated how it impacted my life . (btw twice the child of hell does not mean demon possessed) how a word is read . is important . but sometimes it begins by how it was translated .
  9. Well, if I am possessed, I would like to say that I believe the KJV had nothing to do with it. I'm pretty sure others would agree. I don't really know though.
  10. you must've missed my edit . and i would agree with you . and i wasn't saying you were demon possessed . or insinuating whatever conclusion you may have come to about that .

    and i still would like to think that "wisdom dwells with prudence and finds out knowledge of witty inventions"
  11. dude, i think i'm gonna leave this conversation . you've taken offense to something i said . and it wasn't even directed at you . my whole point was to give allowance for all translations . God can speak through them all . God spoke through the Hebrew Torah as much as the Helensic Septuagint . Paul illustrated that God can speak through anything in the creation to get His point across . so one translation or the other . it doesn't matter so much . but if you want to go really deep . go to the real manuscripts . not the compilations made by Erasmus or W&H . do your own research and be blessed by it .
  12. I did not take offense at you at all. You read something into my post that was not there. I noted that the assessment others have of me as a Christian at times, (should I say often), is rather negative, and even involves believing I am demon possessed. However, my preference for an English translation is the KJV. Then, I noted that I thought the KJV should not be used for how they view me in character. However, it may well be that the KJV does have something to do with their overall negative assessment of me. It sounds funny to me, but it really has happened that way in some instances, where I'm sure they thought my use of the KJV confirmed how I was spiritually defective. Seriously... hmm... and those people used the NIV... so what should I conclude about them? I never thought of it that way... I just always left it to God.

    In regard to translations, I believe that their quality varies on how accurately they represent the original text. The thread began noting that some people told "Idreamofsilence' that the KJV and NKJV were inferior as they were not based on the Critical Text, and using them would lead to a flawed understanding of what the Bible says. I believe just the opposite is true for the reasons I set out.
  13. But you did take offense . you assumed that i was thinking something that others have in the past because a key phrase i used which triggered a stream of painful memories . but i think you're a nice guy and have conducted yourself well in this conversation much better than many Christians would have .

    my reference to children of hell and translations had more to do with the deviant ones we're not discussing here .

    please . calm down . i don't think anything bad of you . and really, it is that God is inside that matters . many christians go through their whole life with only a page of the bible .. and don't become any less a child of God than you or i .
  14. Nope. You are completely wrong about how I was thinking and what I was saying. I merely responded to whether a translation can be assessed by how it affects a person's life. I noted that was a subjective criterion. You said it was not subjective. I noted that if it was not subjective, I would be stuck with how people in the past have assessed me negatively -- but in reality, I do not accept their assessment, because it is completely subjective. And because I know it is completely subjective, I think it is completely funny, and that has caused me no pain. I merely thought that I was using a humorous way to note how this criterion is subjective.

    I do not have to calm down. I am completely calm. However, I think you have to stop attributing ridiculous meanings to my posts. However, I am not saying that you do so, because of the translation version you use. I think the conversation just got difficult for you. Perhaps, you need to calm down. Nothing we have said should be all that significant on a personal level.
  15. I am calm . and not knowing the premise of how i think makes it impossible to draw conclusions of what i mean . especially when i have indicated the opposite . you can think what you want about me . but what you have said is simply not true . and God knows my heart . i will leave the conversation now .
  16. Michael,

    I have absolutely no idea how this statement in the above quote relates to anything I said. Thus, I do not know how to respond. I will just say, that I believe that evaluating a translation by the affect it has on a person is a subjective criterion. And I believe that is the truth.
  17. The Fleisch-Kincaid Gade Level Indicator is the measuring stick the majority of the public schools in the USA use to "slot" textbooks. It is utilized to determine the grade level at which a book reads. The NIV reads at the sixth grade level; the KJV reads at the fifth grade level.

    And, according to the Holy Bible, it is the Holy Spirit who gives discernment. Born again believers take it on faith when they read their Holy Bibles that they will receive wisdom -- not because of their own ability, but because of the working of the Holy Spirit within them.

    Don't buy the worldly conditioned peer pressure lie that the KJV is "harder to read."

    Beware, as a little leaven leavens the whole lump.

    The 1611 is today's KJV.

  18. Jehovah Witness believes there is one God, Jehovah. No Trinity - Christ is the first creation of God; the Holy Spirit is a force. Salvation is through faith in Christ and obeying Jehovah's laws. The End of the World is soon. Heaven is for 144,000 chosen Witnesses, eternity on new earth for other Witnesses. All others annihilated. No hell.
    KJV is the best translation. Other translations are a bit diluted. NKJV, NIV and a few others are good to read as they are easier to understand.
    You have to go with your heart. Believing in God, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit answers your question.

    This thread has been well discussed. Everyone has stated their views and no one is changing their minds.

    With that in mind, it is the opinion of the Moderators, nothing further is to be gained and the thread will be closed.

    If anyone wishes to add something to this thread that is of a differing viewpoint and has not already been covered, please let anyone on the Moderator Team know, and reopening of this thread will be considered.

    Also, the thread has gotten off topic.

    We thank all who participated.

    Moderator Staff
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page