Featured What version would Jesus read?

Well, He's the Author of The Book, and during His Incarnation He and His apostles often quoted from the contemporary translation of the day which was the Septuagint.

 

It enhances my understanding when I read out of a version that the preacher is not using. I have done that for as long as I remember and has always been a help and not a hindrance.

Most here know that the NIV is my favorite Bible translation. Well, even if I was blessed to have a pastor reading from that --I would still want to be reading another translation. It would aid me in understaning. So I'd bring in an NLT or something else.

 

That would be 'operator error.'

 

That's not plain English and it doesn't answer my questions. What do you mean by a "disconnect"? Once again, here is what I wrote:

So in your view, are the "credentials" (as you put it--interesting choice of words) of Jesus watered down simply because a version is modern? Or is there some other reason?

In other words, is modern English somehow less capable of portraying the nature of Christ than 15th-17th century English? If so, in what way? If not, what do you mean?

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your observation reinforces my observation: if everyone is on the same sheet of music, there is harmony.

I am not a physicist. Every mechanical vibration out of harmony shows up as noise at the eardrum.

My brain cannot decipher the goobeldegook--kind of like sounding cymbals and tinkling brass.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A disconnect is when the mind gets stuck on an unfamiliar word or idiom. Attention, comprehension and understanding are encumbered with the mental thesaurus and dictionary activities, trying to figure what a certain word might mean, while the speaker moves on to more confusion--kind of like a Pentecostal unknown tongues event--gibberish and gobbledegook.

Modern English capability is not the question; it is more at the motives of the translators. See the biographies of Westcott and Hort. Also, the charge King James gave to his translators is an interesting read. Another: words transliterated which have facilitated confusion. i.e. baptism, angel. Ecclesia/church/congregation is also an interesting study.

Credentials: yes, why one should believe that Jesus is The Christ, The Son of the Living God.

The Jews as a nation rejected Him in spite of Jesus having shown all the credentials. The Sanhedrin convicted Him of blasphemy: "He makes Himself to be
God."

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James



Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

Everyone is on the same page, reading from the ESV in harmony from the text on the overhead screens. Speak for yourself, but I have no problem reading a verse in one translation and then re-reading it in another.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One more time: the hypothetical situation is the preacher reading and speaking ESV while the audience is hearing ESV and reading KJV from their bibles. This is confusing--been there, done that.

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

One more time: Speak for yourself, but I have no problem reading a verse in one translation and then re-reading it in another.

 

AMEN. And those that can read the original languages well enough may not follow along in an English version at all.

 

It is sinful to lie BJ. W&H were honorable men who sacrificed a great deal and desired to produce a translation that was closer to the original than the Received Text versions such as the KJV. It was not an ideal translation. They tried to make it sound even more archaic than the KJV --but their work paved the way for more accurate and accessible versions of God's Holy Word.

It's better to say :'Yes, I am coming soon.' Amen. Come Lord Jesus.

 

Thanks for clarifying.

But they were not Bible translators.Cautious

Relevance to this discussion?

Relevance?

Relevance????

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With or without the punctuation and paragraphs?
Book report time: someone study and report how Westcott and Hort (the founders of modern English Translations and higher textual criticisms), regarded the Textus Receptus.
Also: How many unauthorized changes did they make in their translations?

Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

Without both.

You made the false charges --you document. Make it your responsibility to start your own thread on the subject.

 

Can anyone doubt that Satan himself is behind the work of so many translators?

 

Yes, I certainly doubt that. Satan has more important work to do. Your "question" is frankly, foolish.

 

Jon, you need to identify who you are addressing. I had made the last post prior to yours. But you were speaking to Jerome, I think.