Interesting Read on Bible Versions

  • 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!

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Christians who repeatedly slander have no credibility. As I have told you a dozen times, if indeed the KJV was *loaded with errors* it would have been rejected by scholars and Christians the moment it was published. When in fact it has been the leading or sole English Bible for over 300 years, it means that you are a liar.

In order to put your vile accusations to rest, I will quote from an article which actually appeared in the very liberal New York Times some time back.

400 Years Old and Ageless
By EDWARD ROTHSTEIN SEPT. 29, 2011

...Pay close attention to the major new exhibition at the Folger Shakespeare Library here, “Manifold Greatness: The Creation and Afterlife of the King James Bible,” and you will see not only manuscripts going back to the year 1000, an early translation from the 14th century, Queen Elizabeth I’s copy of the Bible, and imposingly bound versions of the King James; you will also sense the gradual birth of the modern English language and the subtle framing of a culture’s patterns of thought...

...The consequences, the exhibition recalls, are all around us: “One can hear the language of the King James Bible echoing from English cathedrals to rural American churches, from traditional Anglican hymns to Jamaican reggae music, from the poems of John Milton to the novels of Toni Morrison.” Displays also allude to the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, to R. Crumb’s recent graphic version of Genesis, and to the 2010 film “The Book of Eli,” in which Denzel Washington’s postapocalyptic character must protect the world’s last copy of the King James Bible...

...There is, though, something more profound in the translation’s influence. In many ways its impact resembles the effect of the First Folio of Shakespeare, published just a dozen years later, and the subject of a recent exhibition mounted by the Folger. Both volumes transformed the English language, but also shaped ideas about human nature, freedom and responsibility.


The translators were also aware of their project’s ramifications. “Manifold Greatness,” like some recent books, traces how the very act of translating the Bible was controversial. We see here a 14th-century English version of the Old Testament produced by followers of one of the first translators, John Wyclif; like Wyclif’s own work, it was considered heretical and copies were burned. An image here from a late-16th-century “Book of Martyrs” shows Wyclif’s bones disinterred in 1427 and then burned just to emphasize the point...

...The impact of the King James version was partly unintentional: its success helped strengthen a new culture of the book and weakened the power of the priesthood. But part of that impact may have also come from the nature of the translation. Despite its deliberate archaic sound and its attempt to echo the original text’s peculiarities, the King James version was accessible. It told stories; it enticed readers; its rhythms encouraged memory and repetition. (Consider the change from an earlier translation — “God is my shepherd, therefore I can lose nothing” — to the King James version: “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.”) Narratives once heard formally declaimed from pulpits were turned into chronicles of individual lives facing moral decisions...

...Could this have laid the foundation for the triumphs of the English novel, from Daniel Defoe through George Eliot and Thomas Hardy? Not only did these writers often invoke the biblical text or find inspiration in it; they also embraced its perspective, judging the behavior of their characters and meting out their fates....

... During World War II Winston Churchill wrote about “English-speaking peoples,” and their distinctive perspective on the world. Could some of that be traced to the heritage of the King James Bible, including an emphasis on individual liberty and responsibility? Perhaps, but you cannot survey the riches at the Folger without realizing that you are being given a glimpse of a culture’s birth.

‘Manifold Greatness’ and King James Bible at Folger - Review

Your claim only.

The Wycliff Bible is 700 years old and still used. Some others are 500 years old.

Age does not equal accuracy. The Quoran is 1,400 years old. The Bhagwat Gita 2,500 years.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Cannot God guide a person through even the worst of translations [which one is that?] to his Truth, if the person is really hungry for His kingdom and His righteousness?

Hi amadeus,

You remind me of the original preface to the 1611 KJV, which reads in part,

Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God.

Now, if you want an argument against the King's English, there it is! But just the same, even by the KJV translators, even the crudest translation if indeed a translation is still the Word of God.

I've studied many translations over the years, the manuscript families, the differences, and I like the King James.

Much love!

Mark
 
  • Like
Reactions: Acolyte and amadeus

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
(Seriously, "Thee" and "Thou" are not words Jesus and the disciples used.)

On the other hand, how many English translations show the usage of the Greek singular and plural pronouns? The KJV does in it's ye's and you's, and thee's and thou's.

The Bible was actually written with singular and plural pronouns.

Much love!
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,997
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Now, if you want an argument against the King's English, there it is! But just the same, even by the KJV translators, even the crudest translation if indeed a translation is still the Word of God.
At the time that was written, the issue of corrupted Hebrew and Greek texts was a non-issue. Erasmus had rejected Codex Vaticanus. But we cannot apply that principle today.

Also, the Preface to the KJV plainly stated that their goal was that out of many good ones (Protestant translations), they would make a translation -- ONE PRINCIPAL GOOD ONE -- to which none could justly take exception. And they generally achieved this goal.

Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of [Pope] Sixtus had been true in some sort, that our people had been fed with gall of Dragons instead of wine, with whey instead of milk), but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
11 for God sees us all without partiality.

Or . . .

11 For God does not show favoritism.

The Passion puts this verse as describing God's perceptions of us. He sees us without partiality.

The KJV puts this verse as describing God's action, he does not who favoritism.

I wonder which is truer to the original?

Much love!
Mark
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
At the time that was written, the issue of corrupted Hebrew and Greek texts was a non-issue. Erasmus had rejected Codex Vaticanus. But we cannot apply that principle today.

Shouldn't we still reject corrupted manuscripts?

Much love!
mark
 

amadeus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2008
22,496
31,667
113
80
Oklahoma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
On the other hand, how many English translations show the usage of the Greek singular and plural pronouns? The KJV does in it's ye's and you's, and thee's and thou's.

The Bible was actually written with singular and plural pronouns.

Much love!
Precisely one of my own reasons for staying where I am on this question. Reading the Spanish and the German Bible regularly I am able to readily see the differences you mention in singular versus plural and other grammatical distinctions not commonly or easily made in written modern English. The Oklahoma [not only Oklahoma] designator of "you all" for "you" actually clarifies this difference although usually in a good proper English class "you all" on a written composition would be treated as an erroneous expression.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,997
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Shouldn't we still reject corrupted manuscripts?
Yes we should, and there was ample reason to do so, after Burgon and Scrivener exposed the hoax perpetrated by Westcott & Hort and their cronies. But all the modern textual scholars and translators bought the lies of W & H, hook like and sinker. Therefore Nestle, Nestle-Aland, UBS, etc. are all reproducing the same corrupted critical texts. The deity of Christ was primarily attacked by the Gnostics, and that is reflected in the modern versions. Here is an example (which could be multiplied dozens of times):

◄ John 3:13 ►

TRUE TEXT
King James Bible
And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (omitted)
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And no man has gone up to Heaven except he who went down from Heaven: The Son of Man - he who is in Heaven.
Jubilee Bible 2000
And no one has ascended up to the heaven but he that came down from the heaven, even the Son of man, who is in the heaven.
Young's Literal Translation
and no one hath gone up to the heaven, except he who out of the heaven came down -- the Son of Man who is in the heaven.

CORRUPTED TEXT
New International Version
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man...
English Standard Version
No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man...
New American Standard Bible
"No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man...
Holman Christian Standard Bible
No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven--the Son of Man...
NET Bible
No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven--the Son of Man...

The KJV/TR reading teaches that Christ is Omnipresent God even during His earthly ministry; He is the Son of Man who is in a particular location, and omnipresent Deity who is both on earth and in heaven at the same time. The critical text removes this testimony to Christ’s Deity. 99% of Greek MSS possess the KJV/TR reading, which is also supported by all ancient Latin and Syriac versions, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Georgian, and all Armenian versions. The KJV/TR is also supported by patristic writers such as Hippolytus, Athanasius, Didymus, Aphraates, Eustathius, Chrysostom, Theorodret, Cyril, Paulus Bishop of Emesa, Theodore of Mopsuestia; Amphiochius, Severus, Theodorus Heraclitus, Ambrose, Novatian, Hilary, Victorinus, Jerome, Cassian, Vigilius, Zeno, Marius, and Augustine, among others.

Texts Where the Deity of Christ is Attacked in Modern Bible Versions
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Precisely one of my own reasons for staying where I am on this question. Reading the Spanish and the German Bible regularly I am able to readily see the differences you mention in singular versus plural and other grammatical distinctions not commonly or easily made in written modern English. The Oklahoma [not only Oklahoma] designator of "you all" for "you" actually clarifies this difference although usually in a good proper English class "you all" on a written composition would be treated as an erroneous expression.

I even like to go with the "y'all" for clarity. But, as you say, in the KJV, not needed.

The thing that finally turned me back to the KJV was getting so tired seeing things like reading "Jerusalem", and reading in the footnote, "Heb. Zion", things like that.

That's a real advantage in reading in multiple languages. You can more appreciate the differences between them.

Much love!
 
  • Like
Reactions: amadeus

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes we should, and there was ample reason to do so, after Burgon and Scrivener exposed the hoax perpetrated by Westcott & Hort and their cronies. But all the modern textual scholars and translators bought the lies of W & H, hook like and sinker. Therefore Nestle, Nestle-Aland, UBS, etc. are all reproducing the same corrupted critical texts. The deity of Christ was primarily attacked by the Gnostics, and that is reflected in the modern versions. Here is an example (which could be multiplied dozens of times):

◄ John 3:13 ►

TRUE TEXT
King James Bible
And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (omitted)
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And no man has gone up to Heaven except he who went down from Heaven: The Son of Man - he who is in Heaven.
Jubilee Bible 2000
And no one has ascended up to the heaven but he that came down from the heaven, even the Son of man, who is in the heaven.
Young's Literal Translation
and no one hath gone up to the heaven, except he who out of the heaven came down -- the Son of Man who is in the heaven.

CORRUPTED TEXT
New International Version
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man...
English Standard Version
No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man...
New American Standard Bible
"No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man...
Holman Christian Standard Bible
No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven--the Son of Man...
NET Bible
No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven--the Son of Man...

The KJV/TR reading teaches that Christ is Omnipresent God even during His earthly ministry; He is the Son of Man who is in a particular location, and omnipresent Deity who is both on earth and in heaven at the same time. The critical text removes this testimony to Christ’s Deity. 99% of Greek MSS possess the KJV/TR reading, which is also supported by all ancient Latin and Syriac versions, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Georgian, and all Armenian versions. The KJV/TR is also supported by patristic writers such as Hippolytus, Athanasius, Didymus, Aphraates, Eustathius, Chrysostom, Theorodret, Cyril, Paulus Bishop of Emesa, Theodore of Mopsuestia; Amphiochius, Severus, Theodorus Heraclitus, Ambrose, Novatian, Hilary, Victorinus, Jerome, Cassian, Vigilius, Zeno, Marius, and Augustine, among others.

Texts Where the Deity of Christ is Attacked in Modern Bible Versions

OK . . . we're on the same page. I prefer majority manuscript NT, Septuagint manuscript OT.

Much love!
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,997
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
OK . . . we're on the same page. I prefer majority manuscript NT, Septuagint manuscript OT.
Please study Alfred Edersheim's comments on the corrupted Septuagint in The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. He was a Hebrew Christian who was a scholar and a preacher. So he knew what he was talking about.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes we should, and there was ample reason to do so, after Burgon and Scrivener exposed the hoax perpetrated by Westcott & Hort and their cronies. But all the modern textual scholars and translators bought the lies of W & H, hook like and sinker. Therefore Nestle, Nestle-Aland, UBS, etc. are all reproducing the same corrupted critical texts. The deity of Christ was primarily attacked by the Gnostics, and that is reflected in the modern versions. Here is an example (which could be multiplied dozens of times):

◄ John 3:13 ►

TRUE TEXT
King James Bible
And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (omitted)
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
And no man has gone up to Heaven except he who went down from Heaven: The Son of Man - he who is in Heaven.
Jubilee Bible 2000
And no one has ascended up to the heaven but he that came down from the heaven, even the Son of man, who is in the heaven.
Young's Literal Translation
and no one hath gone up to the heaven, except he who out of the heaven came down -- the Son of Man who is in the heaven.

CORRUPTED TEXT
New International Version
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man...
English Standard Version
No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man...
New American Standard Bible
"No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man...
Holman Christian Standard Bible
No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven--the Son of Man...
NET Bible
No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven--the Son of Man...

The KJV/TR reading teaches that Christ is Omnipresent God even during His earthly ministry; He is the Son of Man who is in a particular location, and omnipresent Deity who is both on earth and in heaven at the same time. The critical text removes this testimony to Christ’s Deity. 99% of Greek MSS possess the KJV/TR reading, which is also supported by all ancient Latin and Syriac versions, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Georgian, and all Armenian versions. The KJV/TR is also supported by patristic writers such as Hippolytus, Athanasius, Didymus, Aphraates, Eustathius, Chrysostom, Theorodret, Cyril, Paulus Bishop of Emesa, Theodore of Mopsuestia; Amphiochius, Severus, Theodorus Heraclitus, Ambrose, Novatian, Hilary, Victorinus, Jerome, Cassian, Vigilius, Zeno, Marius, and Augustine, among others.

Texts Where the Deity of Christ is Attacked in Modern Bible Versions

Not even the KJV says the flesh of Christ was God.

As for John 3:13 they all say the same thing, just not in archaic no longer used English.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,997
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Not even the KJV says the flesh of Christ was God.
What do you think this means?
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)
As for John 3:13 they all say the same thing, just not in archaic no longer used English.
How can you say that they all say the same thing, when they do not? Did you even read my post properly, and the comment at the bottom? And the NIV is THE WORST CULPRIT.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,624
21,724
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Please study Alfred Edersheim's comments on the corrupted Septuagint in The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. He was a Hebrew Christian who was a scholar and a preacher. So he knew what he was talking about.

I'll take a look at it, but it's usage in the NT isn't lost on me. I've read that book, I don't recall what he said, it was many years ago. Wasn't he like a "Masoretic Only-ist"?

Much love!
Mark
 

Deborah_

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2015
904
857
93
Swansea, Wales
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The critical text removes this testimony to Christ’s Deity.

Strange that these articles never list all the verses where the newer versions state Christ's deity more strongly than the KJV.
e.g. John 1:18 (NIV 2011); Titus 2:13 (NIV)
It makes the writers appear very biased - even (dare I say it) prejudiced.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What do you think this means?
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

How can you say that they all say the same thing, when they do not? Did you even read my post properly, and the comment at the bottom? And the NIV is THE WORST CULPRIT.
What do you think this means?
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

How can you say that they all say the same thing, when they do not? Did you even read my post properly, and the comment at the bottom? And the NIV is THE WORST CULPRIT.

It means the the second person of the Trinity took up residence in the flesh, just like our spirits reside in our flesh.

Our bodies are vessels containing our spirits. The true we are spirits.

You claim God died on the cross when God cannot die.

The bible says Christ is the of second Adam and only a man could die for our sins.

You claim Christ is eternal when he did not exist except in promise until the incarnation. You cannot incarnate what already is.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It means the the second person of the Trinity took up residence in the flesh, just like our spirits reside in our flesh.

Our bodies are vessels containing our spirits. The true we are spirits.

You claim God died on the cross when God cannot die.

The bible says Christ is the of second Adam and only a man could die for our sins.

You claim Christ is eternal when he did not exist except in promise until the incarnation. You cannot incarnate what already is.

They all say the same thing with just a little different word order. You're forced interpretation is the problem.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,997
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Strange that these articles never list all the verses where the newer versions state Christ's deity more strongly than the KJV. e.g. John 1:18 (NIV 2011)
New International Version
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
New American Standard Bible
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

1. Christ is NOT "the one and only Son", but "the only BEGOTTEN SON". That is what ὁ μονογενὴς (monogenes) υἱός means. God has other sons (all the children of God through the New Birth) but Christ is the uniquely begotten Son of God. Also, the NIV has added quite a few words which are not even in the text.

2. And Christ is NOT "the only begotten God" since that is a Gnostic corruption of the text (even though it sounds orthodox). But the majority of Greek manuscripts have "only begotten Son" (which corresponds to other verses with the same phrase) whereas only three CORRUPT MANUSCRIPTS - Codex Sinaiticus, P 66, and P75 have this corruption. The real is is whether Christians should put their trust in a handful of corrupt texts rather than the majority of uncorrupted texts.

Titus 2:13 (NIV)
No difference here. All the modern versions have left this as it is. Which does not change the fact that they have generally attacked the deity of Christ through many omissions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Acolyte