The Origen of All Modern Versions

[ittarter]

If it does, then he really is "the nameless one" and therefore divine.

"Why dost thou ask my name, seeing that it is holy?"

 

[OzSpen]

razeontherock,

Anybody know what (relative to this thread) originals Eugene Peterson worked with, coming up with The Message? Same as the Catholic Bible, KJV, or what?

I'm of the view that a one person translation of the Bible is not as healthy as using a committee of translators for checking accuracy. Therefore, I don't recommend The Message as among the better Bible translations. I'd stick with the ESV, the NIV, NASB, and the New Living Translation. For me the best at the moment is the English Standard Version. However, as long as one understands the dynamic equivalence (thought for thought) translation style of the NIV, it also is an excellent translation. I used it for many years.

Regards, Spencer

 

[Hairy Tic]

What the modern world HAS been sold is that "new" is better than "old." If you want to find a legitimate argument in favor of using the AV, spend some time looking into how "new" is nowadays synonymous with "good," and "old" with "bad." Don't waste your time with this nonsense you've written. Please, support the AV, and please, find a historically and logically responsible way to do it. It is a beautiful translation, albeit with shortcomings, but certainly the best devotional read of the English translations -- second only to critical editions of the Hebrew and Greek Bibles, and in those cases only for purposes of academic study.

Let's have a brief look at your "history lesson."

Couldn't help that, minus the AV, your name is made up of six letters too. Your numerology fails to impress.

## Especially as that "soul", who was far from "lost" by the sound of it, is actually called Origenes Adamantius. Origenes = 8 letters = number of perfection (I think; if one is going to play these games).

It always amuses me that great men whose shoes their critics are not fit to carry are called "lost souls" in this way. Let the USA produce a figure of the stature of Origen - then we can talk

So, by the same token, Moses (five letters) was born in Egypt, and we should conclude... what? that he is a servant of death as must as Origen was?

## And if we call him Moshe, that is still only five letters.

The Bible condemns "love of knowledge"? Say it ain't so! (You'd better read through Proverbs a few times, friend.)

Well, YOU believe that the very people who institutionalized the doctrine of Christ's full divinity and humanity AND the Trinity were in fact "evil, evil Catholics," so who are you to judge someone's orthodoxy?

## And it was Catholics, a whole Church of them, who presided over the process of the canonisation of the NT. The evil Catholic Augustine is one of the principal theologians of Calvinism. So that's the Calvinists done for. And as for the NT, it's a post-Biblical abomination, as is evident from the Bible AKA OT. There is not a scrap of evidence that Jesus wanted one.

Not many numbers left, are there? Why write in Koine Greek when the dialect had already died away? Is the AV similarly written in the "more complicated" Elizabethan English, vis-a-vis "the common spoken language" of people nowadays? Should we therefore ditch that version in favor of, what, the Street Bible?

## And why write in the wicked Koine, which was already perverted by having been put to evil use ? No true Christian would do that. Since the Apostles were godless Biblep-contradictors, they used the Koine. Simples.

6. This hexaphala sat around stinking up the place because nobody wanted it until Constantine was looking for some Old Testament Bibles for his new ecumenical denomination. He asked his bootlicker, Eusebius, where he could get some new Bibles. Esebius got all excited and said, “I know just the place!” So, he scampers down to Egypt, like a snake slithering down a drainpipe and asks Origen about where he could get some new versions. Origen says, “I’ve done some translating here, take a look at my 5th column.” (5 – the number of…you guessed it)

It would be just awesome if you could substantiate this claim with actual evidence.

## Considering that Origen had died in 253/4, Eusebius' journey to see him is quite an achievement

I like how anti-catholic you are -- how it makes you assume that Catholicism in the fourth century is the same as Catholicism in the sixteenth century is the same as Catholicism in the twenty-first century. Do you, by chance, see every German and Japanese person you meet in terms solely defined by the second world war?

## Reading Jack Chick does not do an awful lot to promote the critical faculties - the sale of sick-bags, possibly; but not the critical faculties. And Chick is the great promoter of this Egypt/Origen/non-KJV-Bible-bashing.

13. These “bibles” were available to the KJV translators in 1611 and they ignored them because they knew junk when they saw it.

## The KJV NT is influenced by the (Catholic) Rheims NT of 1582, though the Rheims NT was not among the versions to which the the attention of the translators was explicitly directed. William Reynolds, one of men who produced the AV, had a brother named John, who was one of makers of the Rheims-Douai Bible. (The Douai OT came out too late to influence the OT of the AV.)

So the AV is influenced by a Catholic version - better burn the evil AV, & go back to the Geneva Bible.

It would be just awesome if you could substantiate this claim with actual evidence.

It would be just awesome if you could substantiate this claim with actual evidence.

I don't think Rome gives a ratcrap about the thousands of translations we have, and to assume otherwise may be the result of mere egoism.

## That, or Fundamentalist paranoia - I think the latter is often at work. Aggravated perhaps by "exceptionalism". The Pope has probably not even heard of the AV/KJV.

Anyway, you seem to be pretty committed to the idea that the received text is a more reliable source for reconstructing original readings, so I'm not even going to attempt convincing you otherwise, but I hope that you will keep searching and find a more effective way of upholding the AV as one of the great literary works of the English language, and encouraging people to read it for its strengths, not because of the (often forced) supposed weaknesses of the alternatives.

 

[CryptoLutheran]

This isn't the first time I've heard someone try and argue for KJV superiority by attacking Origen and the Alexandrian School.

Know who else was from Alexandria? Athanasius. Yeah, that Athanasius.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ittarter]

It always amuses me that great men whose shoes their critics are not fit to carry are called "lost souls" in this way. Let the USA produce a figure of the stature of Origen - then we can talk

What, you're not into Edwards?

 

[Hairy Tic]

Let’s stir it up a bit - A quick history lesson showing the Origen of all modern versions: Many people have been sold a bill off goods – they’ve been taught that the new versions are just updated King James Bibles with new information.

## Then they have been "taught" by ignoramuses.

All modern versions can be traced back to a lost philosopher named Origen in the 3rd century A.D. A few comments were added for interest – some may find them worthless but that’s fine.

## "All modern versions" ? Not so. Apart from anything else, no-one who presumes to talk about modern versions can afford to be ignorant that the division of text-families worked out by W & H is no longer found adequate.

1. Origen – 3rd century philosopher (Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit,) – Origen – 6 letters – number of man

## As his name was Origenes Adamantios, that number-play is beside the point. Not all the Fathers of the Church spoke English. Actually, none did.

2. Origen was from Alexandria, Egypt – 5 letters – number of death - (a type of the world, God called His Son out of that country; Joseph didn’t even want his bones to stay in Egypt)

## Since the native & Classical names for Egypt:

• Qbt (Coptic)
• Aegyptus (Latin)
• Aiguptos (Greek)

do not have five letters, the number-play is irrelevant. One could add the names of the diocese of the Empire in which this Alexandria was found, perhaps.

3. Origen ran a school of philosophers (Col. 2:8).

## No - a catechetical school. Not quite the same thing. And Colossians is not going to be much help here - it was written much earlier, & not for the benefit of Christians in Alexandria.

4. Origen’s beliefs – didn’t believe the first three chapters of Genesis were literal, questioned the deity of Christ, works salvation, allegorized most of Bible

5. Decided to get into the Bible translation business;

## What a revolting description.That's like saying St. Paul "got into the...business" of writing moral uplift.

came up with a 5-column hexaphala (5 – the number of death) – had 4 of his philosophers (Col. 2:8) to help him – 4 being the number of the world. Each philosopher (Col. 2:8) took a column and put down what he thought the Old Testament said. Origen’s column was the 5th (5 – the number of death). The translations were written in Classical Greek (more complicated), not Koine Greek (the common spoken language which the Bibles of the real New Testament were written in).


6. This hexaphala sat around stinking up the place

## The hexaplar [which is the correct spelling] was not very portable - this is rather obvious, as it was a collation of six columns of text. It was far too large to be copied complete, which is why only fragments of it remain.

The way in which pig-ignorant Fundy Yahoos from the US rave at the greatest Biblical scholar among the Fathers, someone whose footprints they are not worthy so much as to lick, never ceases to amaze. (In view of what follows, that stays in - it has the great merit of being true.)

because nobody wanted it until Constantine was looking for some Old Testament Bibles for his new ecumenical denomination. He asked his bootlicker, Eusebius, where he could get some new Bibles. Esebius got all excited and said, “I know just the place!” So, he scampers down to Egypt, like a snake slithering down a drainpipe and asks Origen about where he could get some new versions. Origen says, “I’ve done some translating here, take a look at my 5th column.” (5 – the number of…you guessed it)

## That is a most impressive achievement.

Constantine orders 50 Bibles to be copied - 331
Origen dies - 253

Most impressive. STM this is probably some Church History as trashed by that celebrated Renaissance man & outstanding scholar, Jack Chick.

7. Eusebius takes 50 copies of Origen’s 5th column and brings them back to Constantine.

Vaticanus and Sinaiaticus most likely came from these. They were written on velum scrolls, which is why they stayed in tact so long, plus, nobody read them – God didn’t have His hand on them.

## God is lacking in the hand department, so that is hardly surprising. And "intact" is one word, not two. As for not being read - they were designed to be read in church, by the reader; not by the average person.

The scriptures were written on papyrus and wasted away because people read and copied them – in other words God used them.

## Papyrus is less durable in a damp climate than vellum. Papyrus is fine in a hot dry climate (such as that of Egypt), but not in a damp one. And unlike papyrus, which presupposes the availability of reed-beds, vellum is obtainable provided one has a sufficient supply of sheep - IOW, "it's dependent on the economy..."

8. From here they end up in Rome with its religion (Catholic).

9. From here they circulate around Italy, Spain, and France (Roman Catholic).

## But nowhere else, obviously - so much for the rest of what is now Europe, & those island just north of what became France. Silly Church historians for thinking Codex Amiatinus was written at Jarrow.

10. In 1400’s or so these manuscripts become the Duhay Rheims (Roman Catholic).

## At least get the name & date right And a knowledge of the printed editions of the Vulgate prior to 1609 might no go amiss.

11. From there the Catholics take their version and go about conquering with the sword to the Americas.

## Quite unlike the entirely peaceful westward expansion of the US, of course. No Indians killed, no treaties broken, no need for reservations. Since the New World was opened up by Spanish-speakers (apart from Brazil), an English translation of the Vulgate would not have been much use to them.

It is a not a good idea to confuse what became the US with the Spanish & Portuguese possessions to the south.

12. The rest of the “Alexandrian bibles” stay locked up in Rome and monasteries. God didn’t want them circulated to the common people anyway.

## Ignorance like that is ineducable

13. These “bibles” were available to the KJV translators in 1611 and they ignored them because they knew junk when they saw it.

## Since Codex Sinaiticus was discovered by von Tischendorff in an Orthodox monastery in Egypt in the 19th century, this is improbable. It's difficult to use manuscripts of which one has no knowledge.

14. In 1881a conference was called to “update” the AV1611. Two “Christian” bible critics (Westcott and Hort) said they had the best and oldest manuscripts. Where do you think they got them? You got it – Vaticanus and Sinaiticus type stuff. They snuck them into the revision committee saying these were the best of the bunch and sold them as fish wraps disguised as manuscripts.

## There was nothing sneaky about the use of Vaticanus or Sinaiticus - as a knowledge of the discussion of the Biblical text long before 1881 would make perfectly clear. But there is no protection against fantasies

15. From this committee you got the RV 1881

16. America joined in the fun with their committee in 1901 – they used the same junk the RV came from and they came up with the RV1901 – from there it went to the RSV, NASV, Good News, Living Bible, NRSV, the New New New RSV, NIV, and all the rest of the new versions.

## With several exceptions. The NEB, the Moffatt Bible, the Knox translation, the Jerusalem Bible, the Confraternity Version, & many more, are related only incidentally if at all to the versions descended from the AV & its successors. The AV NT is indebted for many of its renderings to the Reims New Testament of 1582 - something the poster's source left out.

Well there it is – I’m sure there will be some grumbling in the barracks and I’m sure many will dispute my history but that is how I see it – the new versions are basically Catholic bibles – I’m sure Rome is tickled.

## I think you'll find the CC has better things to do than to worry about an antiquated English translation of the Bible the vast majority of Catholics have probably never heard of.

This bilge about Rome caring a rat's rear end about the AV-KJV is paranoid silliness, all of a piece with fantasies about Jesuits bringing down the State or Catholics keeping guns in churches.

"the new versions are basically Catholic bibles" - that must be why they don't contain all the books the CC reckons as "sacred & canonical".

For those who enjoy their paranoia steaming hot - one of the editors of tne United Bible Societies Greek text of the NT was Monsignor C.-M. Martini, (S. J.) - who is:

• a Catholic
• a priest
• an ecumenist
• a Jesuit
• and now, Archbishop emeritus of Milan

Which makes him in reality all that one Alberto Rivera claimed to be.

 

[Hairy Tic]

Anybody know what (relative to this thread) originals Eugene Peterson worked with, coming up with The Message? Same as the Catholic Bible, KJV, or what?

## 'Fraid not, sorry - I've never seen that version, so I have difficulty telling him from Eugene Nida (of "dynamic equivalence" fame).

 

[Hairy Tic]

OK, now that's one too many letters. 7 is the divine number.

Take my name, for instance: Timothy. It has 7 letters, you can draw your own conclusions from that.

## "Michael" has 7 letters - so I'm safe. Shouldn't "Timothy" become "Timotheos" to be numbered ? That gives you 9 letters - 3 times 3

And 8 is the number of Christ - according to those who go in for this sort of thing

666 = number of man, less than 7 three times over, so very sinful
777 = perfect number
888 = like 666 but very very very good

5 = Divine Tetractys (= 4) + 1 (= Unity unsullied by multiplicity) = very good
11 = number of transgression, exceeding number of the Decalogue, which is 10.
And 153 = a triangular number

OTOH, 11 read upside-down in cuneiform script = 70

This way lies madness...

 

[kiwimac]

Still waiting for evidence of Westcott and Hort being apostates & unbelievers.

 

[Hairy Tic]

If it does, then he really is "the nameless one" and therefore divine.

"Why dost thou ask my name, seeing that it is holy?"

## As "Timotheos" = "fearing God", that makes the OP either a proselyte, or an angel (which fits the reference to Judges 13).

Sauron, Dark Lord of Mordor is called "the Nameless", "him whom we do not name" - he is sort of angelic in status, but fallenly. S. is not very God-fearing, not at all.

 

[Hairy Tic]

What, you're not into Edwards?

## I'm familiar with the name, have heard of the Second Great Awakening, read "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", know he has a high reputation as a theologian, but can't say I know his works at all well. He's quoted at length by William James in "The Varieties of Religious Experience". Is he truly comparable to Origen ? IMO, the only Father whom Origen doesn't overshadow, is St. Augustine. (I think it is disgraceful Origen is not reckoned a Saint.)

 

[ittarter]

## I'm familiar with the name, have heard of the Second Great Awakening, read "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God", know he has a high reputation as a theologian, but can't say I know his works at all well. He's quoted at length by William James in "The Varieties of Religious Experience". Is he truly comparable to Origen ? IMO, the only Father whom Origen doesn't overshadow, is St. Augustine. (I think it is disgraceful Origen is not reckoned a Saint.)

Of course, I was merely being facetious.

 

[heterodoxical]

Nice recitation of the side of the table's arguments you are biased towards. Had you studied the opposition to UNDERSTAND them, not to argue against them, and then decided, I don't think you'd have as much reason to be embarassed as you do now.

If the original KJV was the "right version", I guess it would still have the DIDACHE, APOSTLES CREED, and other apocrypha in it. Instead they took it out. If ORIGEN was really responsible, then they would be in there as well, as they are books Origen had on hand.

Let’s stir it up a bit - A quick history lesson showing the Origen of all modern versions: Many people have been sold a bill off goods – they’ve been taught that the new versions are just updated King James Bibles with new information. All modern versions can be traced back to a lost philosopher named Origen in the 3rd century A.D. A few comments were added for interest – some may find them worthless but that’s fine.

1. Origen – 3rd century philosopher (Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit,) – Origen – 6 letters – number of man

2. Origen was from Alexandria, Egypt – 5 letters – number of death - (a type of the world, God called His Son out of that country; Joseph didn’t even want his bones to stay in Egypt)

3. Origen ran a school of philosophers (Col. 2:8).

4. Origen’s beliefs – didn’t believe the first three chapters of Genesis were literal, questioned the deity of Christ, works salvation, allegorized most of Bible

5. Decided to get into the Bible translation business; came up with a 5-column hexaphala (5 – the number of death) – had 4 of his philosophers (Col. 2:8) to help him – 4 being the number of the world. Each philosopher (Col. 2:8) took a column and put down what he thought the Old Testament said. Origen’s column was the 5th (5 – the number of death). The translations were written in Classical Greek (more complicated), not Koine Greek (the common spoken language which the Bibles of the real New Testament were written in).

6. This hexaphala sat around stinking up the place because nobody wanted it until Constantine was looking for some Old Testament Bibles for his new ecumenical denomination. He asked his bootlicker, Eusebius, where he could get some new Bibles. Esebius got all excited and said, “I know just the place!” So, he scampers down to Egypt, like a snake slithering down a drainpipe and asks Origen about where he could get some new versions. Origen says, “I’ve done some translating here, take a look at my 5th column.” (5 – the number of…you guessed it)

7. Eusebius takes 50 copies of Origen’s 5th column and brings them back to Constantine. Vaticanus and Sinaiaticus most likely came from these. They were written on velum scrolls, which is why they stayed in tact so long, plus, nobody read them – God didn’t have His hand on them. The scriptures were written on papyrus and wasted away because people read and copied them – in other words God used them.

8. From here they end up in Rome with its religion (Catholic).

9. From here they circulate around Italy, Spain, and France (Roman Catholic).

10. In 1400’s or so these manuscripts become the Duhay Rheims (Roman Catholic).

11. From there the Catholics take their version and go about conquering with the sword to the Americas.

12. The rest of the “Alexandrian bibles” stay locked up in Rome and monasteries. God didn’t want them circulated to the common people anyway.

13. These “bibles” were available to the KJV translators in 1611 and they ignored them because they knew junk when they saw it.

14. In 1881a conference was called to “update” the AV1611. Two “Christian” bible critics (Westcott and Hort) said they had the best and oldest manuscripts. Where do you think they got them? You got it – Vaticanus and Sinaiticus type stuff. They snuck them into the revision committee saying these were the best of the bunch and sold them as fish wraps disguised as manuscripts.

15. From this committee you got the RV 1881

16. America joined in the fun with their committee in 1901 – they used the same junk the RV came from and they came up with the RV1901 – from there it went to the RSV, NASV, Good News, Living Bible, NRSV, the New New New RSV, NIV, and all the rest of the new versions.

Well there it is – I’m sure there will be some grumbling in the barracks and I’m sure many will dispute my history but that is how I see it – the new versions are basically Catholic bibles – I’m sure Rome is tickled.

 

[OzSpen]

Nice recitation of the side of the table's arguments you are biased towards. Had you studied the opposition to UNDERSTAND them, not to argue against them, and then decided, I don't think you'd have as much reason to be embarassed as you do now.

If the original KJV was the "right version", I guess it would still have the DIDACHE, APOSTLES CREED, and other apocrypha in it. Instead they took it out. If ORIGEN was really responsible, then they would be in there as well, as they are books Origen had on hand.

I have found that a better explanation of the chain of English-related translations (than given by AVBunyan) is found at Translations. There was a prominent KJV revision (the one I used in my years as a new Christian) in 1769. See also, “Is the King James Version perfect?” and “the KJV of 1769”.


Oz

 

[kiwimac]

Still waiting for proof that Westcott and Hort were heretics or Apostates.

 

[OzSpen]

Still waiting for proof that Westcott and Hort were heretics or Apostates.

Are you aware of this link that gives the "assaulted quotes" vs the "accurate quotes" of Westcott & Hort? See HERE.

Oz

 

[kiwimac]

Actually, that site is mine & still waiting for proof.

 

[heterodoxical]

I have found that a better explanation of the chain of English-related translations (than given by AVBunyan) is found at Translations. There was a prominent KJV revision (the one I used in my years as a new Christian) in 1769. See also, “Is the King James Version perfect?” and “the KJV of 1769”.


Oz

There are three very good explanations at Bible.org. 2 by wallace and i forget the third. Their NeT bible is one of my faves. I can summarize the kjv only issue in one word...bibliolatry.

 

[heterodoxical]

razeontherock,

I'm of the view that a one person translation of the Bible is not as healthy as using a committee of translators for checking accuracy. Therefore, I don't recommend The Message as among the better Bible translations. I'd stick with the ESV, the NIV, NASB, and the New Living Translation. For me the best at the moment is the English Standard Version. However, as long as one understands the dynamic equivalence (thought for thought) translation style of the NIV, it also is an excellent translation. I used it for many years.

Regards, Spencer

Well, the message isn't a translation, it is a paraphrase of a translation.

 

[papaJP]

Let’s stir it up a bit - A quick history lesson showing the Origen of all modern versions: Many people have been sold a bill off goods – they’ve been taught that the new versions are just updated King James Bibles with new information. All modern versions can be traced back to a lost philosopher named Origen in the 3rd century A.D. A few comments were added for interest – some may find them worthless but that’s fine.

1. Origen – 3rd century philosopher (Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit,) – Origen – 6 letters – number of man

2. Origen was from Alexandria, Egypt – 5 letters – number of death - (a type of the world, God called His Son out of that country; Joseph didn’t even want his bones to stay in Egypt)

3. Origen ran a school of philosophers (Col. 2:8).

4. Origen’s beliefs – didn’t believe the first three chapters of Genesis were literal, questioned the deity of Christ, works salvation, allegorized most of Bible

5. Decided to get into the Bible translation business; came up with a 5-column hexaphala (5 – the number of death) – had 4 of his philosophers (Col. 2:8) to help him – 4 being the number of the world. Each philosopher (Col. 2:8) took a column and put down what he thought the Old Testament said. Origen’s column was the 5th (5 – the number of death). The translations were written in Classical Greek (more complicated), not Koine Greek (the common spoken language which the Bibles of the real New Testament were written in).

6. This hexaphala sat around stinking up the place because nobody wanted it until Constantine was looking for some Old Testament Bibles for his new ecumenical denomination. He asked his bootlicker, Eusebius, where he could get some new Bibles. Esebius got all excited and said, “I know just the place!” So, he scampers down to Egypt, like a snake slithering down a drainpipe and asks Origen about where he could get some new versions. Origen says, “I’ve done some translating here, take a look at my 5th column.” (5 – the number of…you guessed it)

7. Eusebius takes 50 copies of Origen’s 5th column and brings them back to Constantine. Vaticanus and Sinaiaticus most likely came from these. They were written on velum scrolls, which is why they stayed in tact so long, plus, nobody read them – God didn’t have His hand on them. The scriptures were written on papyrus and wasted away because people read and copied them – in other words God used them.

8. From here they end up in Rome with its religion (Catholic).

9. From here they circulate around Italy, Spain, and France (Roman Catholic).

10. In 1400’s or so these manuscripts become the Duhay Rheims (Roman Catholic).

11. From there the Catholics take their version and go about conquering with the sword to the Americas.

12. The rest of the “Alexandrian bibles” stay locked up in Rome and monasteries. God didn’t want them circulated to the common people anyway.

13. These “bibles” were available to the KJV translators in 1611 and they ignored them because they knew junk when they saw it.

14. In 1881a conference was called to “update” the AV1611. Two “Christian” bible critics (Westcott and Hort) said they had the best and oldest manuscripts. Where do you think they got them? You got it – Vaticanus and Sinaiticus type stuff. They snuck them into the revision committee saying these were the best of the bunch and sold them as fish wraps disguised as manuscripts.

15. From this committee you got the RV 1881

16. America joined in the fun with their committee in 1901 – they used the same junk the RV came from and they came up with the RV1901 – from there it went to the RSV, NASV, Good News, Living Bible, NRSV, the New New New RSV, NIV, and all the rest of the new versions.

Well there it is – I’m sure there will be some grumbling in the barracks and I’m sure many will dispute my history but that is how I see it – the new versions are basically Catholic bibles – I’m sure Rome is tickled.

Will not argue with you expept to say that you are wrong when you say all new version are basically Catholic Bibles.

As a good Baptist you should know that the KJV Bible was and is the Angelican Bible authorized and ordered by King James of England.

The newer translations include many who have and are based on the oldest and truest Bible works of Greek, Hebrew, Aramic and Syraic.

I am continually amused at the ignorance of many people on the Bible translations.