SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Why do most versions leave out the most important words?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Bill

first hand...thats why its called "learning".

neil

 2007/1/10 12:43
PTywama3
Member



Joined: 2005/3/1
Posts: 156
Tacoma, WA

 Re: Words

Unfortunately, for the most part, words are meaningless. We seem to think that words were of great importance to the common man, that most words really were held with great regard and that in the end, vocabulary was at points in history an incredibly important thing.

As far as I can tell, this has never been true of any but royalty and politicans. It is a completely false understanding, and generally misguided.

In fact, most people who focus on words at the common level have little to no clue as to what words actually mean. Therefore, we use words as if referenced purely by culture. It ends up being moot.

The fact of the matter is that "He" suffices for "God" or "Christ" in an understood fashion, which when numerically considered is completely unfortunate. Reverence by due respect and learned understanding is misplaced by acknowledgement of numbers and partial understanding of someone else's work. Just think about the definition of "opposite" for a second, see what you come up with, and compare that to "antithesis." They ain't the same. Kinda like a subtle reference to "Yaweh" or "Jehova." Both end up being "God."

Numbers are a fun tool for comparison at times, but in today's America, they're teaching kids to be stupidly dependant rather than resourceful. Math is a descriptive tool, designed for analysis of motion, future assumptions, and designated spots in past tense.

But of course, a reasonable glance at the bible with the glasses of a political scientist would be unthinkable. The understanding of how things affected people, their history, and the building and foundations of their mindset have little relevance in a culture which thinks English should rule the world. Because we like our words. No matter if we don't understand what future perfect means.


_________________
David Reynolds

 2007/1/10 13:10Profile
Santana
Member



Joined: 2006/8/17
Posts: 286


 Re:

Quote:
another 100post plus cyber tussle over different Bible versions.



Honestly man, I really want to know what the difference is.

(you don't have to have a reply for every single SI post ya'know.) I don't want an argument here, just the truth.


_________________
Leonardo Santana

 2007/1/10 15:11Profile









 Re: here we go again.

Quote:
What precisely has been accomplished by yet another long boring turgid thread arguing Bible versions......EXCEPT to divide the Body just a little bit more.



First off, if you find it boring then dont participate. There are people asking real honest questions, and instead of offering some insight, you offer insults and criticism. I would prefer you try encouraging those who really want to learn.

Secondly, you ask what has ever been accomplished. I say much! I have learned to strongly disagree with people on this issue, and yet maintain a civil discussion and develop freindships... like with King Jimmy. Also, I have had some totally disagree with me on this topic, and months later they drop me a line letting me know that God used my posts to lead them toward an understanding of the issue. Not all have come to agree with me completely, but because of these discussion, they have learned to understand the issue.

Thirdly, I dont think it's this issue that divides... it's how people discuss it. The KJV does not divide. Pride and sin divides. God's Word unites.

Just because you see no merit in discussing this does not mean that no one else does either. It doent seem very honoring to Christ to mock people who are asking real questions about the Word of God.

Krispy

 2007/1/10 15:42









 Krispy

as I said, "have fun".

"insults"? "criticism"?

forgive me than, if you and others find yet another thread arguing over Bible versions, edifying, please don't let me stop you.

if you really want to see how heated up two guys can get over religion, watch these two Arabs have a go at one another over Iraqi TV.

http://screens.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/saddam-hussein-is-your-master-and-the-master-of-your-parents/

I just watched this, and it strikes as a micro-look into why victory is NOT attainable in Iraq.

Our guys and girls in uniform are caught between these two groups of raging lunatics, raging lunatics I might add, who are armed to the teeth, and we are caught in a foreign urban enviroment admidst a civil war OVER RELIGION.

and what I was trying to say regarding yet another potential cyber tussle over Bible versions is "here we go again".....and I don't intend on participating, but I can and will term that as not edifying....in fact I find them stumbling. If you disagree with that assessment, so be it.

neil

 2007/1/10 16:23
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Quote:

I am dumfounded that you would use the same eronious statement to discredit the KJV as athiest, and ultra liberals do.
Quote: "There are differences in manuscripts mostly because of copyists errors, as for thousands of years copies of the bible were made by hand"



My dear brother, I pray you not be dumbfounded. I am not making the argument of an atheist. Quite far from, I am as serious as they come when it comes to a jealousy for the gospel's sake and the glory of God. Reading over part of Acts and the Psalms today I was ready to burst into tears over lunch at work while I just felt so moved inside or a longing for the church to be as glorious as it once was.

The simple matter of fact is that for the New Testament there are over 5,000 different Greek manuscripts, ranging from as early as the second century up until shortly after the invention of the modern printing press. I am less familiar with the Old Testament texts, however, to my knowledge there are about 2,000 Hebrew/Aramaic manuscripts that make up the Old Testament. Of these manuscripts, there are not any two that ever agree exactly with another.

This is no atheistic argument. This is a simple matter of scholarly fact. Good, God-fearing, conservative, fundamental, evangelical, born-again, spirit-filled scholarship believes all this.

Quote:

FACT one The bible as we know it has not been around for "thousands of years", only 2 thousand.



Well, this would make it "thousands" of years then. Not to mention the Old Testament, which starting with the books of the Law is roughly another thousand years old.

Quote:

And then to follow that statement up with the bold faced lie.
Quote: "It's not so much that the modern versions leave parts of things out, but rather, the manuscripts they base their translations on are ever-so-slightly different than one used by the KJV."

THERE IS NOTHING EVER-SO-SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TO THE "MAJOR" ALTERATIONS UNDERTAKEN IN MOST NEWER VERSIONS.



Brother, if I am mistaken, please state so. I am humble and willing to learn. You don't need to be so inflamatory. And even if you are right, being ugly for the sake of the truth makes you just as wrong as a false prophet.

If you ever get a chance to learn Greek, grab a critical edition of the Greek NT, such as NAS27 or USB4. These are Greek texts used by scholars across the world, conservative and liberal. In these Greek texts, ample footnotes are provided of most every variant from most Greek manuscripts, including quotes as they appear in the early church fathers. It will tell not only what the Greek variants are, but which manuscripts support which variants, and what the dates of those manuscripts are, and where those manuscripts were generally located.

This way, the translator is entirely FREE to choose if they want to go with the text as rendered by the NAS27/UBS4 scholars. Or if they want to, they can disagree with the scholars who compiled this Greek manuscript, and choose another variant that they believe is most likely closest to the original.

For the fact of the matter is, copyist errors did enter into the copying process. That is why we have thousands of manuscripts that are not in full agreement in every place. Some of these differences are bigger in some places than others. But overall, the copyist errors would be a small percentage of the actual NT text (save for the so-called 'Western' text, which was more of an early NT paraphrase, and has about an additional 10% more Greek words in the book of Acts).

Most variants can be explained simply as misspellings, or switching word order around, or sometimes copying the wrong part of a passage (e.g. looking at the wrong sentence.) An even smaller number of variants can be explained as an attempt by the copyist to "soften" a "hard" saying. Very few of the variants can be explained as many conspiracy theorists would attempt. These things, if you have a basic working knowledge of Greek, are easier to understand.

The fact of the matter is that the major modern translations (e.g. NASB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV) are not trying to leave things out as somehow to destroy the Christian faith or minimize whatever doctrine some conspiracy theorist might be proporting. It is simply that they have based their translations on slightly different Greek manuscripts than that of the KJV. For some of the ancient manuscripts that have been discovered and analyzed since the time of the KJV translation are deemed by most modern scholars, conservative and liberal alike, to be far more accurate. These manuscripts do not always contain all the exact same wording as the text that served as the basis of the KJV in all the same places.

In essence, one could argue that from the perspective of modern scholarship, conservative and liberal, that many of these "disputed" sections of scriptures were actually LATER additions by various copyists. So, instead of modern translations using a Greek text that is guilty of "taking away" what was originally there, it could be said the texts that were generally later and served the basis of the KJV, were guilty of "adding" something that was originally not there.

I would encourage the original poster to this thread to perhaps investigate this matter for yourself. I would suggest not leaning too heavily on what you find on the internet to form the basis of your conclusions though. Ultimately the only real way you will ever be able to know for yourself is to come to a basic working knowledge of NT Greek. For without it, you will never be able to analyze the original Greek manuscripts for yourself, and will always have to take somebody else's word for it.

I thought this book that I used in seminary was a pretty good introduction to the subject. It assumes some knowledge of Greek to be able to read all of it, but, for the most part, is understandable without:

New Testament Textual Criticism: A Concise Guide, by David Alan Black.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2007/1/10 16:55Profile
MrBillPro
Member



Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 3233
Texas

 Re:

Quote:

KrispyKrittr wrote:
I have learned to strongly disagree with people on this issue, and yet maintain a civil discussion and develop friendships... like with King Jimmy.
Krispy



Brother this about says it all, and this is the way I have always thought "Christians" were supposed to be.

I was really being humorous in my post Bartle, I am sorry if my post forced you to say something like this.

Bartle said:
Oh boy, arent the lost envious of the fruit of so great a salvation?
"look how they love one another".
have fun kids.




Kids? wow! that pretty cold but I have to admit I am a kid at heart. :-)

we all could use a "tad" more humor here, is it ok for Christians to laugh? :-P

I don't really come here enough to know if there is some un forgiveness or animosity between folks, but man as Christians I am guessing there
shouldn't be.

Maybe someone was just having a bad hair day trust me I have quite a few of them, but I try not to let the world know. :-P


_________________
Mr. Bill

 2007/1/10 17:28Profile
MrBillPro
Member



Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 3233
Texas

 Re: Krispy

Quote:

bartle wrote:


if you really want to see how heated up two guys can get over religion, watch these two Arabs have a go at one another over Iraqi TV.

http://screens.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/10/saddam-hussein-is-your-master-and-the-master-of-your-parents/

I just watched this, and it strikes as a micro-look into why victory is NOT attainable in Iraq.

Our guys and girls in uniform are caught between these two groups of raging lunatics, raging lunatics I might add, who are armed to the teeth, and we are caught in a foreign urban enviroment admidst a civil war OVER RELIGION.


neil



Neil, I don't like the war either, but how on earth can you not even possibly think that this war could be all in Gods plan? I have read a lot of books on the end times "not saying there the truth" but I really personally believe this war is all in Gods plan for the end times.


_________________
Mr. Bill

 2007/1/10 17:50Profile
wonserwonton
Member



Joined: 2006/11/20
Posts: 59
Longview WA

 Re:

Quote:
Kids? wow! that pretty cold but I have to admit I am a kid at heart.



Mark 10:14 Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

:-P


_________________
Amy King

 2007/1/10 18:37Profile
Smokey
Member



Joined: 2005/2/21
Posts: 417
Edmonton Alberta Cda.

 Re:

KJ


Quote:
It's not so much that the modern versions leave parts of things out, but rather, the manuscripts they base their translations on are ever-so-slightly different than ones used by the KJV.

Sir, it is you that has chosen to include all "modern versions" in your defense of the newer translations. Again I state that I am dumbfounded that you would consider offerings such as The Message® The Living Bible® & the TNIV® ( just to mention a few) as being only "ever so slightly" different.

You know as well as myself, and most people who venture here, that you can trot out numerous scholars that will support your view, and I can trot out just as many scholars that oppose your view, and when all is said and done, nothing will have been accomplished.
The fact is that the KJV and the "modern versions" are translated from two entirely different streams of manuscripts, both of which were known about by the translators of the KJV, and the scholars of that day rejected the Alexandrian manuscripts as being unreliable.
If, as you believe, the texts for the "modern versions" are so superior, why do the translators continue to pump out vast numbers of diffrent bibles,each one more and more corrupt (in my opinion), supposedly from the same text??
Blessings Greg


_________________
Greg

 2007/1/10 19:12Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy