Bible Translation Study
- Thread starter Mayflower
- Start date
-
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!
Have someone read it to you.
My kids grew up reading it without a hitch.
I taught it to sinners of all ages in home or prison meetings for 40 years and nobody else had a problem with it at all.
Amen.
I have an observation exercise for you.
Listen to ministers quote from the anointed KJV by memory...it flows.
Listen to a minister attempt to quote from memory, any other version...it is impossible.
It is a phenomenon to watch.
God obviously assists the KJV.
My pastor is trilingual in translations. He quotes by memory several different versions. Have no idea how he keeps up. He doesnt seem to like KJV much. My last church was all KJV. And pastor knew a lot of scriptures too. I think the important part is both churches know the Word and live the Word. I just changed churches, because I wanted to go deeper in the Word and the people are very passionate here about the Bible. I can see it in their worship during music, their focus, edge of seat during the sermon, their words and actions. They also pray in tongues and believe in healings and miracles for today. The Bible teaches this in every translation. The best Bible is the one you read and apply. Memorization is important too, but if it stays in the soul and doesnt feed the spirit, it doesnt do much at all. This has been true in my own life.
That's a first. I observed ministers quoting the KJV(one I knew could quote all of it, during hard preaching or teaching, verbatim).
Anyone I ever saw trying to use side by side translations had their "KJV annointing" derailed.
Maybe he has a photographic memory?
I have just the opposite, but when I begin to witness or teach, the KJV flows back to me.
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
My work is cancelled too. But still have an appointment to get skin cancer cut out. I guess I save some vacation lol
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
I am not sure. Really only the luv only cult complains no one else does that I know of
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
No from what I understand it was a process. Let me look it up...
How Did We Get the Bible? - Focus on the Family
Part of article:
The New Testament Canon
Now the question remains about how the Christian church ultimately put the parts of the Bible together. This really relates to the New Testament, as the Old Testament was already accepted and codified in the books accepted by the Jewish people as divinely inspired. But following the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ around 33 A.D., the fledgling Christian church found itself struggling for survival and, in the process, writing inspired documents that would later become the New Testament. The process of canonization has to do with what writings are deemed inspired and thus included in the New Testament canon. The word canon originated in reference to a measuring reed or standard by which something is measured. In reference to the Bible a canon has to do with genuinely inspired writings. The Church was very methodical in reference to the New Testament canon. Several criteria were necessary in order for a writing to be accepted, It’s also important to note that God guided the process in accordance with His plans. As such, the process of canonization was not left solely in the hands of fallible human beings. but we will mention three here. First, the document in question had to conform to the rule of faith, “conformity between the document and orthodoxy, that is, Christian truth recognized as normative in the churches.” D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Zondervan, 1992), p. 494. Second, the document required some sort of apostilicity, “which as a criterion came to include those who were in immediate contact with the apostles.” Ibid. Third, “a document’s widespread and continuous acceptance and usage by churches everywhere” Ibid., p. 495 was taken into consideration. From God to us, the Bible is true, reliable, and inspired.
Part of article:
The New Testament Canon
Now the question remains about how the Christian church ultimately put the parts of the Bible together. This really relates to the New Testament, as the Old Testament was already accepted and codified in the books accepted by the Jewish people as divinely inspired. But following the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ around 33 A.D., the fledgling Christian church found itself struggling for survival and, in the process, writing inspired documents that would later become the New Testament. The process of canonization has to do with what writings are deemed inspired and thus included in the New Testament canon. The word canon originated in reference to a measuring reed or standard by which something is measured. In reference to the Bible a canon has to do with genuinely inspired writings. The Church was very methodical in reference to the New Testament canon. Several criteria were necessary in order for a writing to be accepted, It’s also important to note that God guided the process in accordance with His plans. As such, the process of canonization was not left solely in the hands of fallible human beings. but we will mention three here. First, the document in question had to conform to the rule of faith, “conformity between the document and orthodoxy, that is, Christian truth recognized as normative in the churches.” D.A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Zondervan, 1992), p. 494. Second, the document required some sort of apostilicity, “which as a criterion came to include those who were in immediate contact with the apostles.” Ibid. Third, “a document’s widespread and continuous acceptance and usage by churches everywhere” Ibid., p. 495 was taken into consideration. From God to us, the Bible is true, reliable, and inspired.
1st person, I and we. And glad you mentioned it, 3rd person, him, them, you even keep gender on him and her.
But 2nd person in English is 'you', for singular or plural. Unless you go with "y'all".
Much love!
Eternally Grateful
Well-Known Member
One thing to remember. Peter called Paul’s writings scripture and Paul quotes I believe Luke and mentions it as scripture
So this makes Me think...
Hidden In Him
Well-Known Member
Ok, not, LoL.
The trouble there, Paul, is that they would not have the Spirit of God on the inside of them to know what was being said at all, and since Greek words can go a number of ways depending on context, you would end up with some of the strangest translation on earth, particular if spirits from the god of this world got ahold of them (which they likely would). You cannot escape interpretational bias, Paul, no matter who is picked to translate.
I'm certain your desire is pure, but the above doesn't sound like much of a solution, bro.
God bless,
- H
I can't even find your post now @Paul Christensen . My thought is if the Bible is God-breathed, He wouldn't use a non Christian to write His Word. It wouldn't be worship in the Spirit.
One thing about the Message translation though, it was written by a former Satanist who turned His life over to Christ. That is absolutely amazing.
One of the first things a student learns at ANY seminary, evangelical or liberal, is how corrupt the Hebrew and Greek texts used by the KJV translators really is. This corruption is the inevitable result of its use of the latest manuscripts which display many centuries of accumulating copy errors. The KJV also contains translation errors, but those are the least of its problems.
The best strategy for the layman is to have one modern literal translation (e. g. NIV) and one more understandable and readable paraphrase translation. Then you can check whether the insights gleaned from the paraphrase still hold up in the literal translation.
The best strategy for the layman is to have one modern literal translation (e. g. NIV) and one more understandable and readable paraphrase translation. Then you can check whether the insights gleaned from the paraphrase still hold up in the literal translation.
Last edited:
You just described the very purpose of a seminary. To destroy any semblance of a pure word of God, so they can become the new closet translators for cash.
CharismaticLady
Well-Known Member
And you admit to committing willful sins of lawlessness? Well, at least, no one can accuse you of being a hypocrite.
Last edited:
Hidden In Him
Well-Known Member
With all due respect to the KJV only people, I learned it rather quickly without attending seminary. Any moderate study of the original languages will reveal it fairly quickly, and it's not as if I had any bias going in. Just that the TR is so obviously flawed that one can't help noticing it.
Similar threads
