1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured What Stand Does BJU Take?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by John of Japan, Feb 16, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Top Posters
Page 4 of 8
  1. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Do you agree with his general tone, that the modern version were not satanic inspired, and do not intentionally water down Jesus and the Gospel message?
     
    #61 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  2. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Dr. White doesn't deny that KJVP exists, he just doesn't address it since he has no issue with it. Everybody(english readers) prefers some English version.

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #62 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
  3. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,638
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes.

    In particular, it is impossible for any Biblical text to be Satanically inspired, since it is God-breathed in the originals. To become Satanically inspired, it must be purposefully mistranslated, such as in the JW Bible's rendering of John 1:1.
     
    #63 John of Japan, Feb 22, 2017
  4. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He is not saying that those who are Majority text advocates are all KJVO. He is saying that some KJVO are majority text advocates. He states that the TR text is different then MT and different types support one or the other. He also states that "a number of different possible postions fall within this one category."

    He is defining the KJVO arguments by postion of defense. He is not defining all of those who advocate for the MT or even the TR. To expect Dr. White to proper define all postions of those who hold to MT or TR property is unfair. That is not the intent of the book.

    He says Farstad and Hodges view is "one group that would strongly reject the term KJVO but believe that the texts used by KJV translators are superior to those used my modern translations would be majority text advocates". What is wrong with that? Were they not majority text advocates?

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #64 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
  5. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Nevermind previous post then....i have the 2009

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #65 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
  6. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,638
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Faith:
    Baptist
    My first edition of the book starts out with an intro about a radical KJVO person in a bookstore demanding a "real Bible, the Bible God honors, the King James Bible, the A.V. 1611" (p. iii). Then he goes on to strongly accuse the KJVO movement of destroying churches. This (true or not) sets the tone for the first chapter.

    After this beginning he gives his taxonomy, from which I quoted in this thread, in Ch. 1, "King James Only." Before listing his taxonomy he writes, "The King James Only movement...defies precise definition. One will find a range of beliefs within the broad category of 'KJV Only.' We run the risk of offending individuals within the movement when we make broad generalizations [Ya think??--JoJ], but such cannot be avoided completely. Hopefully, by defining the various positions found within the movement, we can help to focus attention upon the important issues that are at stake" (p. 1).

    He then goes on to list his taxonomy, including "Group #2," which I quoted above. In that section, on p. 2 he refers to "Majority Text' advocates, mentioning in the footnote on pp. 5-6 such genuine scholars of textual criticism such as Hodges, Farstad, Robinson and Pierpont. This means he thinks of these genuine scholars, all of who oppose (or opposed) strongly the KJVO position, as KJVO advocastes.

    As one who gladly contributed an essay to the 2014 Festschrift in honor of Dr. Maurice Robinson, Digging for the Truth, I find this very insulting.
     
    #66 John of Japan, Feb 22, 2017
  7. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, looks like he fixed that is the second edition. It is in the body of the book, not the footnote, that he says they reject KJVO, but lays ground work for some moderate KJVO people to use Farstad's and others work and postion to justify the KJVO postion.

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #67 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
  8. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That is true, as evidenced here on the board!
     
    #68 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  9. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The 2 main Majority texts though would NOT be the sources used by KJV, correct?
     
    #69 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  10. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    They would instead support those translations based upon those 2 texts then? Such as the Web bible?
     
    #70 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  11. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,638
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm glad to hear that. One of these days I'll get the second edition, though I've been told by a textual critic that it has many inaccuracies in that area.
     
    #71 John of Japan, Feb 22, 2017
  12. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He would regard Critical text as best, and Majority text as also good, but not so much TR, correct?
     
    #72 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  13. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    He is a CT guy. He obviously has respect for MT arguments*, but finds the CT argument more convincing. I have never seen Dr. White treat the arguement of TR priority with any respect in regards to viability. My guess he would flat out reject a TR priority as foolishness. He obviously rejects the "TR only" claim.


    *I should clarify he has respect for SOME MT arguments

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #73 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
  14. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I used the text of the greek NT by Kurt Aland in school, what is MT version for that?
     
    #74 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  15. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,638
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I just took a look at Ch. 1 of the revision of White's book on Amazon, and he has left the offending section pretty much as is. In a footnote on p. 73 and again in the bibliography, he does list a number of the scholarly sources by Dr. Robinson on the Byzantine Priority position. However, he then jumps to another subject, giving no indication in that section that he has read and understood Dr. Robinson's body of work.
     
    #75 John of Japan, Feb 22, 2017
  16. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,638
    Likes Received:
    1,834
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That would be the UBS Greek NT, now in its 4th edition. My 3rd ed. lists Matthew Black, Carlo Martini (a Catholic), Bruce Metzger and Allen Wikgren as editiors.
    I'm not sure what you mean here.
     
    #76 John of Japan, Feb 22, 2017
  17. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The best in probably Robinson- Pierpoint
    If you mean a Top quality MT.
    Farstad's would be nice to have. I do not like Pickerings claim behind his ....so i would avoid that one.

    I also assume your mean the NA 26, 27 or 28 as Aland's?


    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #77 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
  18. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Maybe he understands better the critical text po
    sition

    Where do you stand on this question/discussion?
     
    #78 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  19. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I was speaking towards the text book by Kurt Aland that described the process of the Greek nt being pieced together, as regards to the critical text, anything like that fir the MT?
     
    #79 Yeshua1, Feb 22, 2017
  20. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Page 73? I believe i got my info from page 23 or 24. 73 Shouldn't be chapter one anymore....but maybe it is. I will check my paper copy at home.

    Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
     
    #80 McCree79, Feb 22, 2017
Page 4 of 8
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...