Mutilated manuscripts and modern translations....help!

[WorshipBassist]

I've just been reading a Chick extract about the translation of the King James Bible. In this track it said that many translations of the Bible are corrupted because they relied on 'corrupted' Latin Vulgates and also on 'Satanic' Alexandrian Greek texts.

It also said that the Westcott and Hort Greek text is Satanic.


Surely this cannot be the case?

 

[D.W.Washburn]

Jack Chick is a King James Onlyist. It is my opinion that he uses illogic, hyperbole and poor reasoning to make the KJVO case.

He also has an anti-Roman Catholic bias which may account, at least partly, for his dislike of the Vulgate. He brands many things as "Satanic" apparently for the reason that he personally disagrees with them.

Westcott and Hort were men of faith, though the faith they held was more liberal than Jack Chick's. They set out to determine, as best they could, the original text of the New Testament. They developed a good set of intellectual tools for that purpose. The question is not whether they were good people, but whether they were right in their assessment of the New Testament texts. For the most part, they were.

The Alexandrian family of NT texts are, generally, older and more reliable than the Byzantine ("majority") text type.

For the most part, the differences between the text types are small and technical. The Byzantine texts have a few verses not found in the Alexandrian texts. None of these differences has any effect whatever on Church doctrine. That is, every doctrine of the Church can be derived without recourse to the verses "missing" from the Alexandrian texts. More accurately those verses were added to the Byzantine texts.

 

[cyberlizard]

treat yourself to a decent text (or borrow one from the local library) on the canon of scripture. Recommend books by either metzger or bruce (as good starting blocks) and avoid pop-historians like 'chick publications'.


Steve

 

[ebia]

I've just been reading a Chick extract about the translation of the King James Bible. In this track it said that many translations of the Bible are corrupted because they relied on 'corrupted' Latin Vulgates and also on 'Satanic' Alexandrian Greek texts.

It also said that the Westcott and Hort Greek text is Satanic.


Surely this cannot be the case?

Why would you want to read Chick tracts (except maybe for a good laugh)?

 

[WorshipBassist]

Why would you want to read Chick tracts (except maybe for a good laugh)?

My Christian Union uses a couple of the tracts for use in our Firestarters evangelical project.

 

[ebia]

My Christian Union uses a couple of the tracts for use in our Firestarters evangelical project.

Using them as firestarters would be a good idea, but I suspect that's not what you mean.

Seriously, your CU needs a kick up the backside - even if the tracts you use don't contain any of his usual nonsense anyone who goes and looks up his other material will quickly realise that he's a bigotted nutcase, and bang goes any credibility.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I've just been reading a Chick extract about the translation of the King James Bible. In this track it said that many translations of the Bible are corrupted because they relied on 'corrupted' Latin Vulgates and also on 'Satanic' Alexandrian Greek texts.

It also said that the Westcott and Hort Greek text is Satanic.

Surely this cannot be the case?

Pure utter nonsense. Without that text and the ByzMaj texts, we would be stuck with just one Text or what I call "one witness". Best to just go to all 3 texts to reconcile the NT with.

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7167075&page=3

8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega" [*beginning and end], is saying [*the] Lord [*the God]. The One-being, and the One-was, and the One-coming, the All-Mighty!

TexRec) Revelation 1:8 egw eimi to a kai to w arch kai teloV legei o kurioV * ***** o wn kai o hn kai o ercomenoV o pantokratwr

ByzMaj) Revelation 1:8 egw eimi to alfa kai to w legei kurioV o qeoV o wn kai o hn kai o ercomenoV o pantokratwr

W-H) Revelation 1:8 egw eimi to alfa kai to w legei kurioV o qeoV o wn kai o hn kai o ercomenoV o pantokratwr

 

[Iosias]

Aims of OT Textual Criticism by Bruce K. Waltke
Theories of the Translation Process by Bruce M. Metzger
Persistent Problems Confronting Bible Translators by Bruce M. Metzger
English Translations of the Bible, Today and Tomorrow by Bruce M. Metzger

http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/

 

[Iosias]

The Alexandrian family of NT texts are, generally, older and more reliable than the Byzantine ("majority") text type.

Highly debatable, whilst they are older they need not be more reliable.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

Highly debatable, whilst they are older they need not be more reliable.

Everything is debatable, hence my modifier "generally." I find the arguments preferring the Byzantine text type less convincing. The bumper sticker slogan "Textual evidence must be weighed, not just counted" sums the matter nicely.

 

[Simonline]

Post deleted