• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! 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!

Featured The King James Version

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by Lik3, Dec 6, 2017.

  1. gordonhooker

    gordonhooker Franciscan tssf Supporter

    904
    +426
    Anglican
    Married
    You succeeded you were very funny and I like your work.
     
  2. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +2,300
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    The KJV was taken from the first Greek NT manuscript to come off the newly invented printing press. The first book printed on Gottenburgs printing press was the Latin Vulgate. Followed closely by the Masorite text (Old Testament Hebrew). Erasmus was the Jesuit who crafted Textus Recepticus (the recieved text) based on the Byzantine manuscripts. It went throgh at least 6 revisions and while true to the original it had some mistakes. Modern translations are based on Wetcott Hort who gave preferense to Codex Vaticanus and Codex Siniacus. The Codex are written on leather so they are far more resilient the the papyrus scrolls. Vaticanus and Siniacus are only two texts, the Byzintine texts are represented by literally tens of thousands of extant manuscripts.

    The plain and simple fact is that there isn't a dimes worth of difference between the manuscripts and the textual criticism that goes into modern translations make the wording bland and lack the more emphatic and authoritative tone of the KJV. Its interesting to note the KJV was 85% identical to Tyndales Bible and so was the Geneva Bible.

    I'm not King James only but so many concordances, dictionaries and commentaries are keyed to it, it's always my primary tezt.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  3. gordonhooker

    gordonhooker Franciscan tssf Supporter

    904
    +426
    Anglican
    Married
    These days I use both accordance and logos Bible study software for serious academic scholarship so reliance on paper based concordances, dictionaries and commentaries is no longer an issue.

    As for language of the KJV and older Bibles goes - I am afraid a sheperd boy these days would not find it the vernacular of the day.
     
  4. OzSpen

    OzSpen Regular Member

    +487
    Australia
    Baptist
    Private
    brinny,

    It's the other way around. Versions such as the KJV ADD words and verses that are not in the earliest manuscripts (MSS).

    Erasmas only used a handful of MSS for the Textus Receptus that lies behind the KJV. Thousands more, earlier MSS, have been found that demonstrate the TR has added verses and variants.

    Oz
     
  5. OzSpen

    OzSpen Regular Member

    +487
    Australia
    Baptist
    Private
    So the word 'hell' ought to be omitted from the NKJV because the KJV translates 3 different Greek words as 'hell'. The NIV gives a more accurate translation using the principles of dynamic equivalence, thought-for-thought.
     
  6. OzSpen

    OzSpen Regular Member

    +487
    Australia
    Baptist
    Private
    Gordon,

    Do you have access to the Arndt & Gingrich Greek lexicon, the 'Bible' of lexicons, online?

    What about Kittel & Friedrich's massive 10 vol word studies? Do you have access to free online resources for these vols?

    Oz
     
  7. gordonhooker

    gordonhooker Franciscan tssf Supporter

    904
    +426
    Anglican
    Married
    No I am afraid I don't, but will go and do some google searches to see if I can access. I only use those that I have available in Logos and Accordance. I have uploaded 2 screenshots of what I have available. I also have Sacra Pagina, Word Biblical NT and OT, Berit Olam, the JPS commentaries in Accordance, and a number of NT Anchor Yale commentaries in Logos. I simply cannot afford anymore at this point in time.
    If you need any extracts from my collection let me know and I can copy some extracts within reason :).

    AccordanceGreek.jpg LogosGreek.jpg
     
  8. gordonhooker

    gordonhooker Franciscan tssf Supporter

    904
    +426
    Anglican
    Married
    For the past few years I have always been the Reader for Psalm 22 at our Maundy Thursday Eucharist and foot washing service, I read the psalm as the Sanctuary is stripped and the Tabernacle is emptied and left open. I find the KJV language for those types of reading be more uplifting and suitable for that purpose, but as a translation for reading the OT, Epistle and Gospel of day the modern translations are far better.
     
  9. Der Alter

    Der Alter This is me about 1 yr. old. Supporter

    +1,690
    Baptist
    Married
    Here is a link to BAG online. Drawback it does not reproduce the Greek. Click on the Greek Name to see words beginning with that letter.
    A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Gingrich & Danker

    A PDF of Brown, Driver, Briggs Hebrew lexicon can be DL at this link.

    https://ia801707.us.archive.org/24/items/00825376.1523.emory.edu/00825376_1523.pdf
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2017
  10. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +10,333
    Lutheran
    Single
    US-Others
    More accurately it is a misrendering of YHVH/YHWH; even "Yahweh" is only an educated guess at pronunciation, but a far better one than "Jehovah" which was the result of medieval scribal misunderstanding.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
  11. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +10,333
    Lutheran
    Single
    US-Others
    That would mean God had to have invented a writing system for Adam to use, and to be frank that's, if not surpassing, at least bordering on the absurd. The earliest form of writing for which we have any evidence is cuneiform, which was invented by the Sumerians as a simplification of older pictographs and simple numeric notation. Other, independent writing systems developed elsewhere, such as in China and in Egypt largely following a similar pattern of pictographic proto-writing to writing proper. What we know today as the Hebrew abjad, for example, is actually the Aramaic script which was borrowed to write Hebrew in the post-exilic period. Prior to the adoption of the Aramaic script there did exist what is known as the Paleo-Hebrew script, a form of which is still in use today by the Samaritans. Paleo-Hebrew and Aramaic are both derived from the earlier Phoenician script, which is descended from Proto-Sinaitic, likely coming from Egyptian hieroglyphs, a comparison between the Egyptian hieroglyph for "ox", and Proto-Sinaitic aleph, along with Phoenician, Paleo-Hebrew, and Aramaic aleph show the development of a pictographic representation of "ox" being borrowed to use as a morpheme in an proper writing system. Which in turn gave rise to the Greek alpha, and Latin 'A'.

    [​IMG]
    From left to right: Egyptian hieroglyph, Proto-Sinaitic, Phoenician, Paleo-Hebrew, Aramaic.

    [​IMG]
    From left to right: Etruscan, Greek, Coptic, Latin

    -CryptoLutheran
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  12. EastCoastRemnant

    EastCoastRemnant I Must Decrease That He May Increase Supporter

    +826
    SDA
    Married
    Here are few to consider... there are lots of great sites that expose the errors of the different translations.

    In Acts 6:23, the KJV and some others state it this way..

    The NKJV and others like the NIV, state it this way...

    Some, like the NIV don't even bother to capitalize servant in their version, further degrading Christ.

    NKJV
    KJV
    This change takes the glory intended for God in this verse and places it on the Israelites.

    NKJV
    KJV
    Here, you can clearly see the difference between Jesus only helping us, and becoming as like we are.

    These are but a few of the many errors taught throughout the NKJV... what I think is all the more dangerous is that most people truly think it only replaces the thee's and thou's.
     
  13. EastCoastRemnant

    EastCoastRemnant I Must Decrease That He May Increase Supporter

    +826
    SDA
    Married
    Here are some other things to consider...

    The KJV originated in the dying words of William Tyndale in 1536, when he was burned at the stake by Anglican Catholics for translating and printing the Bible in the English language. Prior to expiring in the flames, he cried out, "Lord, open the eyes of the king of England." By the grace of God, King James I of England called for a new version in English in 1604. The saints with the testimony of Jesus and the commandments of God have always been the despised and persecuted enemies of pagan and papal Rome. Their crime? Possessing the word of God (Rev 6:9; 12:11,17; 14:12; 20:4)! Read the preface of the King James Version. The translators of the NKJV would have trouble even reading the wonderful document, and they would not understand the holy reverence for the word of God and the holy hatred for Catholicism and self conceited scholarship! Read how the translators affirmed that the Pope is the man of sin and how they foretold the certainty that popish persons and self conceited scholars would both surely malign their efforts.

    The NKJV was copyrighted as a moneymaking scheme of Thomas Nelson Publishers. They stole the name of a king and a Bible in the public domain, plagiarizing work previously done, and copyrighted it for their financial advantage and perpetual income. If they had hearts for the truth even a fraction of Tyndale and the KJV translators, they would give the Bibles away or, in the worst case, sell them at cost. But they sell it for a profit right along with the NCV, the NAB, the NRSV, and the ICB.

    Thomas Nelson Publishers renamed their KJV the New KJV, because they needed a new name for copyright purposes, and they were pandering to a generation that wants new religion rather than the old paths (Jer 6:16; Acts 17:21). Their version is certainly new; it has new words with new doctrines and new emphases for a new kind of Christian, the kind Paul warned would arise in the perilous times of the last days (II Tim 3:1-7; 4:3-4). It is a mongrel version from the manuscripts the KJV translators used and the manuscripts they refused to use! It is found in contemporary Christian churches promoting casual worship and compromising doctrine and practice. It is very rarely found among those men and churches fully dedicated to the apostolic faith and old paths of Scripture.

    From... The NKJV is a Fraud!
     
  14. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +10,333
    Lutheran
    Single
    US-Others
    I assume you mean Acts 3:26.

    This might be a problem if it wasn't for the fact that the Greek text reads,

    ὑμῖν πρῶτον ὁ θεὸς ἀναστήσας τὸν παῖδα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν, ἀπέστειλεν αὐτὸν εὐλογοῦντα ὑμᾶς ἐν τῷ ἀποστρέφειν ἕκαστον ἀπὸ τῶν πονηριῶν ὑμῶν

    The word υἱός "son" doesn't appear in the text, instead we have παῖδα, from παῖς, which can mean "child" but tends to be used in the sense of a youthful servant, "servant boy" would probably be acceptable as a translation, though not exactly lofty in reference to the Son of God, and so rendering it as "servant" is more respectable sounding. The KJV translation of "Son" here is in keeping with earlier reverential translations of this verse, such as the Bishop's Bible and Tyndale which translates it here as "sonne", whereas Coverdale has "childe", which is certainly a more faithful translation. Wycliffe, translating from the Vulgate, uses "sone". And that is likely the source here, as the Vulgate has here "Filium", from Wycliffe translates as "sone", and this is retained in Tyndale and the Bishop's Bible (retaining these Latin peculiarities was somewhat normative of early English translations, it's the reason why Isaiah 14:12 has "Lucifer" rather than an actual translation of the Hebrew). How does Luther translate this? He uses the German word "Kind", "child".

    So right here we have a rather perfect example of why comparing translations against the KJV is an inherently erroneous procedure. The KJV is not the litmus test of a translation's accuracy or quality, all translations must be measured against the source material itself. The KJV is not immune to this same level of scrutiny.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
  15. JackRT

    JackRT "Karma" can bite you in the butt Supporter

    +6,968
    Canada
    Christian
    Married
    You do realize that in the original Greek there is no capitals?
     
  16. EastCoastRemnant

    EastCoastRemnant I Must Decrease That He May Increase Supporter

    +826
    SDA
    Married
    We have them now and use them to denote authority, especially with regards to God.
     
  17. ViaCrucis

    ViaCrucis Evangelical Catholic of the Augsburg Confession

    +10,333
    Lutheran
    Single
    US-Others
    It sounds to me like this is a personal hangup you have, and as such is irrelevant to discussing the inherent quality of a translation.

    Personally I do capitalize the first letter of words related to God, such as "He" and "Him"; but that's tradition, upbringing, and personal choice. If someone didn't capitalize "Him" that's not somehow an act of sacrilege; it may offend your personal religious sensibilities, but then again your personal religious sensibilities aren't the litmus test of what constitutes proper reverence to the Deity.

    -CryptoLutheran
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  18. JackRT

    JackRT "Karma" can bite you in the butt Supporter

    +6,968
    Canada
    Christian
    Married
    I have no objection to the use of capitals in modern translations but it is over the top to accuse someone for not using them.
     
  19. 1stcenturylady

    1stcenturylady Spirit-filled follower of Christ Supporter

    +2,526
    United States
    Charismatic
    Celibate
    US-Republican
    My modernized Tyndale New Testament is expected to arrive tomorrow. I can't wait to compare it to the KJV.
     
  20. 1stcenturylady

    1stcenturylady Spirit-filled follower of Christ Supporter

    +2,526
    United States
    Charismatic
    Celibate
    US-Republican
    I know what you mean, but it is all in how we are raised. As a child, to help us revere the Bible, we could not put anything on top of the Bible, like our keys or purse, or another book (except another Bible.) I'm 70 and I still can't put anything on to of a Bible, and cringe when others do. I'm not judging them, but I still shudder and have to hold myself back from grabbing the keys and putting them to the side. :grimacing:
     
Loading...