The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

It might harm my delicate skin!

_________________
The proof of love is in the works. Where love exists, it works great things. But when it ceases to act, it ceases to exist.

I was wondering when this website would be cited as a source. I actually lol'd.


Again, so? Should we quit using math because it was largely developed by pagan polytheists? I love the old, "all-translators-except-king-James'-were-trying-to-deceive-Christians-and-make-them-worship-the-devil-argument, as if the committee of scholars assembled by king James had totally pure motives while every other translator had secret, ulterior motives.

_________________
Στηθι εδραιος, ως ακμων τυπτομενος. - Ignatius |II Timothy 4:2| All Scripture is NKJV, unless a translation from the Greek text or otherwise noted.
M.A. Theological Studies (New Testament), Faith Seminary, Tacoma WA
Member, Evangelical Theological Society, North American Patristics Society.
Assistant Editor and contributing author of several published and forthcoming publications.

...or as if God had been content to work around the imperfections of King James's translators, but not those of any subsequent scholars. The invented slurs on Westcott, Hort et al. are an attempt to bolster this curious position, I guess.
 
It seems to me as if the KJV is popular with people like Steve because they have founded a range of doctrinal ideas on misunderstanding it. Accurate translations in English they can't not understand thus represent an existential threat to their private theologies.

God's Word tells us that no one is perfect - and that certainly applies to translators of the Bible. So we can say with authority that no translation is perfect!

We can also emphatically state that no one can begin to understand the mechanics of translation unless they have learned a language other than their native tongue. Different languages say the same thing with differring grammatical/linguistic patterns.

We have a wealth of information. God has made English readers rich with the NIV, NET, ESV, etc.

Let us not make God's blessings into wedges to divide believers. I do thank those who have brought accurate information to the discussion

John

_________________
"The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." Gal 5:6b

Pastor John C. Blackburn

I always thought the KJV was a bastion of clarity with renderings such as this, "Changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, The glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails." And this also, "O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged. Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels. Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged."

I know people get a lot out of the alleged poetry of the KJV, and it is certainly true that some of its wordings are particularly beautiful, however, on the whole, it is increasingly obscure for readers today and obscurity is not a positive attribute for any translation.

Cheers

_________________
The proof of love is in the works. Where love exists, it works great things. But when it ceases to act, it ceases to exist.

Much has been made of the Textus Receptus. Its general editor was one Erasmus of Rotterdam. Though I am no fan of the KJV I am not one to cast aspersions on the man.

He said some things of considerable wisdom. Two of the most famous are:

"You should not offer your handkerchief to anyone unless it has been freshly washed. Nor is it seemly, after wiping your nose, to spread out your handkerchief and peer into it as if pearl and rubies might have fallen out of your head."

"If you cannot swallow a piece of food, turn round discreetly and throw it somewhere." (Emphasis mine)

_________________
john.hopkins1954 at Skype
jhhopkins1954 at Microsoft Live Messenger
johnharoldhopkins@comcast.net

 
Sheer delight, jh! I shall quote that at my kids.

"...straitened in your own bowels?" Aaargh! I wince to think of the inapposite dogma that could be spun from this one, DB...

_________________
The proof of love is in the works. Where love exists, it works great things. But when it ceases to act, it ceases to exist.

(...and not just the mind, either.)

We could start a competition...

_________________
"The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." Gal 5:6b

Pastor John C. Blackburn

I really feel for the folks in this thread. It's like adults arguing with four year-olds who simply don't want to understand, though I will not at this time make it explicit who are the four year-olds in this particular case. Fun to read, though a few parts were a bit laborious.


That is a swell idea. Perhaps the new thread is in order, as pastorjohn has suggested. No reason to water down the comedy that's already to be found here.

_________________
http://biblerants.blogspot.com

Dear friends

I think andyjonezz did good work in refuting the slander against Westcott and Hort. It is sad to see that irrefutable evidence that they were not Satanists or Spiritualists are ignored.

The problem of textual criticism was always how to get to the most original or neutral text of the Bible. Current textual criticism has shown that this aim has been based on a wrong understanding of what a scroll is, and even what the Bible is. I think it is not New Testament criticism that should challenge the way that we think about the Bible text as an original, but the Old Testament. After the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the discovery of the Ugaritic clay tablets and other finds, it is clear that books often went through a process of development. We find in Hebrew and other Semitic verse the practise of the inflation and deflation of lines of poetry according to certain rules as an example. It may have meant that a scribe didn't only copy a manuscript/ scroll, but depending on the amount of papyri or parchment left, could inflate or deflate certain lines. This seems to have been a general practise in Ugarit at least. Some book scrolls of the same book at Qumran are longer and other are shorter following different textual traditions, in some cases inflation and deflation played a role. Does this mean the one text is more important than the other?

I find it interesting that the early Christians, who were mostly ethnic Jews accepted the textual traditions of the Septuagint as well as that of the Hebrew Bible as the Word of God. They didn't have an issue with what is the correct meaning. Church fathers like Irenaeus were known for quiting the same New Testament Scripture in different situations, using different textual versions. In one case a clearly unoriginal version of a verse is quoted to refute heretics.

The Bible, or the scrolls of the Bible, or the books of the Bible was alive until the invention of the book press. In certain communities a certain textual tradition enjoyed preference due to their belief and own history. The text impacted on the scribes and the scribes impacted on the text. From time to time, it was acceptable.

I am of the opinion that we tend to choose to quickly, either... or... I think one should treasure each textual variant because it tells the story of God's interaction with his church at different times in different circumstances.

In this process, the gurus of textual criticism like the late Westcott and Hort can help us to understand God's involvement in Christian communities even after the Bible was brought together.

Kind regards


Elimelek

There can be little doubt that the reputations of two Godly men have suffered at the hands of KJV-Onlyists and their heresy.

_________________
“God wished iron to be used for the cultivation of the earth, and therefore it should not be used to take human life.” Cyprian 250 AD

For those interested in Westcott and Hort and the lies told about them, the following site is informative.

http://www.westcotthort.com/

_________________
“God wished iron to be used for the cultivation of the earth, and therefore it should not be used to take human life.” Cyprian 250 AD

kiwimac:

Well, I'm not King James Only, and Westcott wrote some helpful commentaries.

It's a pity that Hort went over the top and referred to Textus Receptus editions of the Greek New Testament, used for centuries, as 'vile'. I certainly don't go with the excesses of some King James Only rhetoric. But in some ways Hort was immoderate in his use of terminology,too, in an area which calls for painstaking and meticulous judgment.

_________________
Read the Bible prayerfully.For a wealth of sound theology, go to John 3:16.
(My wife and I are very much in love, by the way.)
I don't like extremes of temperature. I don't like extremes among preachers. People maybe think I'm extreme.But never mind about me
A true Christian is different, and the world will notice the difference.Even your tattoo, if it's faith related, it's different!