SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : what bibletranslation to get?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 Next Page )
PosterThread
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Hello roadsign (Diane)...

Thank you for your post. You will be in our prayers!

:-)


_________________
Christopher

 2007/5/11 9:14Profile









 Re:

ccchhhrrriiisss...

Even if Easter is a mistranslation (which I really dont think it is), is it really an error? I'm sure the translators would have a very detailed explanation for why they used "easter", but unfortunately we cant ask them. They were extremely well educated men, and I doubt they just stuck that word in there without much debate.

But, unlike the hundreds of differences between the KJV & the modern versions, this example of what many are more than excited to call an error really makes no difference to [b]any[/b] biblical doctrines.

I think at worst, this is an example of where the translation could have been clearer, but not an error.

But I think the explanation is legitimate. And I think the translators knew exactly what they were doing, and would offer us a very detailed explanation for why it's there.

But I could be wrong. I'm open to that.

Krispy

 2007/5/11 9:18
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1132
Missouri

 Re:

Krispy, there is a reason the 'Easter' translation comes up every time.

This has been said before but it needs to be said again. Easter is a mistranslation in the KJV. But don't take my work for it:

Let’s just take a look at what some respected scholars have to say concerning this subject. I hate to ‘name drop’ but this is important in a discussion like this:

John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
intending after Easter,
or the passover,

Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
intending after Easter--rather, "after the Passover"; that is, after the whole festival was over. (The word in our King James Version is an ecclesiastical term of later date, and ought not to have been employed here).

Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible
He would do this after Easter, meta to pascha — after the passover, certainly so it ought to be read, for it is the same word that is always so rendered;

A.T. Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament
After the Passover (meta to pasca). The passover feast of eight days. "The stricter Jews regarded it as a profanation to put a person to death during a religious festival" (Hackett). So Agrippa is more scrupulous than the Sanhedrin was about Jesus.

Nave's Topical Bible
Easter (a.v.)
* (Should be translated "Passover," as in RSV and most other translations) Acts 12:4

Easton's Bible Dictionary
Easter [S]
originally a Saxon word (Eostre), denoting a goddess of the Saxons, in honour of whom sacrifices were offered about the time of the Passover. Hence the name came to be given to the festival of the Resurrection of Christ, which occured at the time of the Passover. In the early English versions this word was frequently used as the translation of the Greek pascha (the Passover). When the Authorized Version (1611) was formed, the word "passover" was used in all passages in which this word pascha occurred, except in Act 12:4. In the Revised Version the proper word, "passover," is always used.

Going back to the verses in Acts:

Acts 12:1-4
1Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
2And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
3And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
4And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

The key to understanding this passage is to see why Herod put Peter in prison. It pleased the Jews. Luke takes care to tell us that this was happening during the days of unleavened bread which was associated with Passover. Now, put yourself in Luke’s shoes for a moment. Does it make sense that when Luke writes “meta to pasca” in this verse he is referring to a Easter festival celebrated by pagans? This is the same Luke who in his gospel used pascha 7 times—all referring to the [url=http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/freqdisp.cgi?book=lu&number=3957&count=7&version=kjv]passover[/url]

Considering that Luke tells us Herod saw that his actions were pleasing to the Jews and that all this occurred during the days of unleavened bread—associated with Passover, Herod did not want to insult the very people he wanted to please, so he decided to wait until the feast days were over to bring him to the people. Also, note Mark 14:1-2 "After two days was the feast of the passover, and of unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death. But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar of the people."

The feast day refers to the feast of the passover and of unleavened bread.

But for me the most compelling argument is this:

King James Word Usage of pascha - Total: 29
Passover 28, Easter 1

 2007/5/11 9:21Profile
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1132
Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
We see then, from studying what the BIBLE has to say concerning the subject that the order of events went as follows:
On the 14th of April the lamb was killed. This is the passover. No event following the 14th is ever referred to as the passover.
On the morning of the 15th begins the days of unleavened bread, also known as the feast of unleavened bread.
It must also be noted that whenever the passover is mentioned in the New Testament, the reference is always to the meal, to be eaten on the night of April 14th not the entire week. The days of unleavened bread are NEVER referred to as the Passover. (It must be remembered that the angel of the Lord passed over Egypt on one night, not seven nights in a row.



Dr. Samuel C. Gipp, Th.D. is incorrect. Luke 22:1 says, "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover."
Luke 22:7 says, "Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed."

The day of the feast, the feast of unleavened bread and Passover are used interchangeably as Luke himself attests.

 2007/5/11 9:27Profile
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4779


 Re:

Hi Krispy...

In my opinion, the Acts 12:4 reference of Easter is a mere ERROR OF TRANSLATION (like Matthew Henry indicated). I do know several individuals who defend the celebration and use of the term "Easter" due to its inclusion in the Word of God. Is that really a doctrinal issue? It could (and has) become one by some people. To me, the issue is moot because we know that the Word doesn't acknowledge such a term as having any dire meaning.

However, you raise the very heart of the issue: There is a real difference between "modern versions" (like the NIV) and ancient "modern versions" (like the KJV) [u]BECAUSE[/u] they are translated from completely DIFFERENT SOURCES! As much as this topic is discussed, a few individuals will continue to make accusations that the modern translations (like the NIV) "add or remove words" from the Word of God. We can point out that the versions are translated from different sources over and over again, yet people will continue to make blanket, surface observations with the purpose of indicating a "conspiracy" to destroy or discredit God's Word.

My opinion of the matter is this: Regardless of the differences between translations taken from the [i]Textus Receptus[/i] or the other academic and credible sources, the true doctrine of the Church remains sound in both the KJV and the NIV.

Some believers have gone to great lengths to portray the NIV as soft on sins like homosexuality. Yet it remains completely clear that homosexuality is a sin. Some people have gone to great lengths to portray the NIV as denying the deity of Christ. Yet the NIV remains completely clear that doctrine of the Trinity exists. In fact, I cannot find a single undeniable doctrine of our Faith that has been ultimately altered by the complete NIV. While a word or phrase may change DUE TO THE SOURCES USED, the ultimate doctrine of the Church remains the same as you read the whole.

:-)


_________________
Christopher

 2007/5/11 9:35Profile









 Re:

Altho I lean toward the theory that the translators included Easter for a reason (the one I listed), I am ok with the idea that it could have been translated clearer. As you said, it really is a mute point because it is inconsequencial to any important issues.

Quote:
However, you raise the very heart of the issue: There is a real difference between "modern versions" (like the NIV) and ancient "modern versions" (like the KJV) BECAUSE they are translated from completely DIFFERENT SOURCES! As much as this topic is discussed, a few individuals will continue to make accusations that the modern translations (like the NIV) "add or remove words" from the Word of God. We can point out that the versions are translated from different sources over and over again, yet people will continue to make blanket, surface observations with the purpose of indicating a "conspiracy" to destroy or discredit God's Word.



Here I agree with you completely. I believe any conspiracies happened in anciet times when the manuscripts were altered. I am of the opinion that it was the Alex Text that was altered... and I think the evidence and history behind the Alex Text prooves this.

I do question the motivation of the publishing companies, but not necessarily the translators. Any new translation is a short term money maker. The amount spent on marketing new translations is mind boggling. I find it interesting... even humorous... that there is really no marketing of KJV's, yet the only modern version that comes close to challenging the KJV in sales is the NIV.

I do question the integrity of some of the translation committees, but not necessarily their motives. For instance, there was an outspoken lesbian on the translation committee of the NIV. It was not a secret that she was a lesbian... she is "ordained", and written quite a bit about justifying the gay lifestyle with scripture.

That, to me, is a red flag... but apparently not to those on the translation committee.

One of the translators on the committee of the NASB released an article a few years after it's release repenting of having been a part of it's translation, and declaring his allegiance to the KJV.

I think that says something.

I'm sure if we do the National Enquirer thing and examine the KJV translators we could come up with some dirt on a few them to. We're all human. But what I'm talking about are sins of a lesbian that were not hidden, but over looked. And a translator who later stated he was wrong.

Does this mean if you read an NASB or NIV then you arent saved? Of course not... I was saved in an NIV church. But as believers we should be interested in truth. My search for truth lead me to where I am today.

Krispy

 2007/5/11 10:06
Nile
Member



Joined: 2007/3/28
Posts: 403
Raleigh, NC

 Re:

Quote:

KrispyKrittr wrote:
Nile... I have a 7 or 8 volume set of Matthew Henry's commentary, hard back. It's my favorite set of books I have. Henry's commentary was, of course, based on the KJV. It starts at Genesis 1:1... has a portion of scripture, then Henry's expository teaching, then the next portion of scripture, then Henry's expository teaching... and on and on.

I love it, and I think you might like it too. I paid less than $30 on ebay for it, and it was in near perfect condition when I got it. (still is)

Krispy



Alright, thanks for the recommendation! I'll keep an eye out for it/put it on my list of books to get.


_________________
Matthew Miskiewicz

 2007/5/11 11:22Profile









 Re:

I don't see "Easter" being mentioned as a problem, no more than I think the days the the week are less holy for having pagan names:

Monday (Moon Day), Tuesday (Tyr's [Mars day]), Wednesday (Woden's [Odin's] Day), Thursady (Thor's day), Friday (Freyja [Venus] day), Saturday (Saturn's day), Sunday (Sun day)....

Pagan months of the year:

January (Janus' day - the god of portals), February (februum, purification in Latin), March (Mars, god of war), April (Aphrodite - goddess of love), May (Maia - mother earth goddess), June (Juno - Zeus's wife), July (Julius Ceaser), August (Augustus)...

Quote:
In most languages of Christian societies, other than English, German and some Slavic languages, the holiday's name is derived from Pesach, the Hebrew name of Passover, a Jewish holiday to which the Christian Easter is intimately linked. Easter depends on Passover not only for much of its symbolic meaning but also for its position in the calendar; the Last Supper shared by Jesus and his disciples before his crucifixion is generally thought of as a Passover meal, based on the chronology in the Gospels.[1] Some, however, interpreting "Passover" in John 18:28 as a single meal and not a seven-day festival,[2] interpret the Gospel of John as differing from the Synoptic Gospels by placing Christ's death at the time of the slaughter of the Passover lambs, which would put the Last Supper slightly before Passover, on 14 Nisan of the Bible's Hebrew calendar.[3] According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, "In fact, the Jewish feast was taken over into the Christian Easter celebration."

The English name, "Easter", and the German, "Ostern", derive from the name of a putative Anglo-Saxon Goddess of the Dawn (thus, of spring, as the dawn of the year) — called Ēaster, Ēastre, and Ēostre in various dialects of Old English. In England, the annual festive time in her honor was in the "Month of Easter" or Ēostur-monath, equivalent to April/Aprilis[4]. The Venerable Bede, an 8th Century English Christian monk wrote in Latin:

"Eostur-monath, qui nunc paschalis mensis interpretatur, quondam a dea illorum quae Eostre vocabatur et cui in illo festa celebrabant nomen habuit."

Translates as: "Eostur-month, which is now interpreted as the paschal month, was formerly named after the goddess Eostre, and has given its name to the festival."

 2007/5/11 12:41
hmmhmm
Member



Joined: 2006/1/31
Posts: 4994
Sweden

 Re:

can anyone provide a complete list of the "missing" verses? or the added verses depending on how you look at it.... id like to go through them all and compare and see what the difference makes for my self. Grateful for any help. I thought it would be easier to see how great the difference is.

God bless you


_________________
CHRISTIAN

 2007/5/11 12:56Profile









 Re:

This is not an exhaustive list, but here is a list of missing or altered verss:

(Keep in mind, some modern versions do include them in the text, but there will be a footnote saying "the older and more reliable manuscripts omit" ... which the Alex Text has never been shown to be either "older" or "more reliable")

Matthew 1:25, 2:11, 5:22,44, 6:13,33, 9:18, 11:23, 14:33, 16:3, 17:21, 18:11, 19:16-17, 20:7,16,22,23, 20:20,21:44, 22:30, 23:14, 26:31,33, 27:35


Mark 1:1,2, 5:6, 6:11,20, 7:16, 9:29,44,46,4, 10:24, 11:3,8, 13:14, 14:68, 15:28,39, 16:9-20

Luke 1:28, 2:14,22,33, 4:4,8, 6:48, 8:45, 9:54-56, 11:2-4,54, 12:31, 17:36, 22:19-20,43-44, 23:34,38,42,45, 24:3,6,12,36,40,42, 51-52

John 1:14,18, 3:16,18, 3:13, 5:3b,4, 6:69, 7:53-8:11, 8:6, 9:35, 10:14-15,29, 18:36, 1 John 4:9
Acts 1:3, 2:30,47, 7:45, 8:37, 9:5,6, 15:34, 17:26, 18:7, 20:28, 23:9

Romans 5:1, 8:1, 9:5, 10:15, 13:9, 14:10

1 Corinthians 5:4, 10:20,28, 11:24, 11:29, 13:3, 15:47

2 Corinthians 4:6

Ephesians 3:9, 5:9

Colossians 1:2,14, 2:18,23

1 Timothy 3:16

2 Timothy 3:16

Hebrews 3:6

James 5:16

1 Peter 1:22

2 Peter 3:10

1 John 5:7-8,18

Revelation 13:18, 22:14, 22:1

Krispy

 2007/5/11 13:06





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy