But the group will have an easier time plucking out the worm.If you trust that one man, yes. When you have a group, you may have a worm in that apple.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
But the group will have an easier time plucking out the worm.If you trust that one man, yes. When you have a group, you may have a worm in that apple.
If you wish to gain a proper understanding of Sinaiticus and the minority text, please read and study The Revision Revised by John W; Burgon (for starters). There were many reasons for the omission of words, clauses, sentences, and whole passages (many of them doctrinal). This has to be connected to the Gnostic heretics and their attempts to alter Scripture.
It was Dean Burgon, who unhesitatingly denounced the manuscripts on which the modern versions are based. Scrivener agreed with him:
What we are just now insisting upon is only the depraved text of codices Aleph A B C D – especially of Aleph [Sinaiticus] B [Vaticanus] D [Bezae]. And because this is a matter which lies at the root of the whole controversy, and because we cannot afford that there shall exist in our reader’s mind the slightest doubt on this part of the subject... We venture to assure him, without a particle of hesitation, that Aleph B D are three of the most scandalously corrupt copies extant; exhibit the most shamefully mutilated texts which are anywhere to be met with; have become by whatever process (for their history is wholly unknown), the depositories of the largest amount of fabricated readings, ancient blunders, and intentional perversions of the Truth, which are discoverable in any known copies of the Word of God (The Revision Revised, pp. 15-16).
Addition was rarely an issue.
I didn't know that!It is interesting to note that Augustine originally adopted a Cessationist stance and communicated that to the hierarchy in Rome. It was only after he witnesses miracles that he could not deny that were of God that he changed his stance and pleaded with the church authorities to acknowledge his repudiation of Cessationism and that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit were still evident in the church. But the papal authorities refused and maintained his original Cessationist stance to be the policy of the church.
Saddened to hear of your medical issues. There is a verse that could be encouraging: "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord heals them of them all". It is in times like these that being a faithful believer is what it is all about.Ever heard of a typo? It is 80% of Tyndale in KJV.
I'm suffering from severe renal failure & heart malfunction & typing from a hospital bed on a mobile phone.
Do you wwant me to quit posring?
Oz
Hope you get better soon!Ever heard of a typo? It is 80% of Tyndale in KJV.
I'm suffering from severe renal failure & heart malfunction & typing from a hospital bed on a mobile phone.
Do you wwant me to quit posring?
Oz
It is interesting to note that Augustine originally adopted a Cessationist stance and communicated that to the hierarchy in Rome. It was only after he witnesses miracles that he could not deny that were of God that he changed his stance and pleaded with the church authorities to acknowledge his repudiation of Cessationism and that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit were still evident in the church. But the papal authorities refused and maintained his original Cessationist stance to be the policy of the church.
It is interesting to note that Tertullian was the first church father to prohibit women's ministry in the churches.Augustine is one of the church fathers that I learned to love. Tertullian is another, and of course Francis of Assisi. Then Don Finto and Jack Hayford! And John Bevere. I think it ends there. Oh, ya, I forgot John Wesley. I wish I could go on, and on. But false doctrines took over.
I wonder if that was before or after he left the Roman church and became a Montanist, which had 2 female prophetesses.It is interesting to note that Tertullian was the first church father to prohibit women's ministry in the churches.
It has nothing to do with character of Tyndale. The worrying point for me is that 8080%of KJV
The Message is not a dynamic equivalence translation but a paraphrase by 1 man.
Check out differences.
Oz
Ever heard of a typo? It is 80% of Tyndale in KJV.
I'm suffering from severe renal failure & heart malfunction & typing from a hospital bed on a mobile phone.
Do you wwant me to quit posring?
Oz
One of the reasons why the church went against women ministry was in opposition to Montanism with its female prophetesses. It equated Montanism with heresy and domination of women in its ministry. The church had the notion that if women dominated, it would lead to a departure from orthodoxy.I wonder if that was before or after he left the Roman church and became a Montanist, which had 2 female prophetesses.
True, but most modern translations now, though they say they are "translations" (using dynamic equivalency loosely as a guide) a not much better than the message.
Addressing the OP. good point.I didn't think this fit in Bible study. But I did want to open a thread to discuss the differences in translations of word for word versus word for thought Bibles, and how to identify when the meaning is changed. I believe the best translation is the one a person applies. But at the same time, it is also a slow fade.
My thing with KJV, is I was raised on it, and I do find it accurate in teaching. My thought though, is even when the people spoke in Hebrew and Greek, it didn't mean "Thee and Thou." It was translated first in the 1600s. I personally like NASB as a good Word for Word translation.
If the Bible changes in meaning though, from even these Word for Words, I would really like some examples and to learn how to identify these things. I like to use multiple translations, because I do not know Greek and Hebrew. I think the Bible translating the Bible is better then commentaries, but only if the same message is being put across. I love to just read The Message translation. It really brings context to passages even if it is just the thought rather then the exact translated Word.
Thoughts?
Most modern translations are... translations! The same as the KJV and all the rest. The great majority of them are produced by committees of people who have devoted their lives to giving us the best translations that have ever been. We are all blessed by the works of scholars that have produced Bibles in the language that all English-speaking, reading, and writing people use.
I think the Bible translating the Bible is better than commentaries, but only if the same message is being put across.
The Message translation
AMEN!!All we have to do now that we have all these great translations, is to actually do the Bible so that we can see the power of God operating to achieve what Jesus was anointed for, and how that anointing is passed on to genuine Christian believers through the Holy Spirit to do the works that Jesus did, even greater works, as He has promised.
Committees and councils can fine tune the instruction book until the cows come home, but unless someone starts to do what it tells us to do, then it remains just empty words that remain within the covers of the book. If all else fails...follow the instructions!