• 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!

Search results

  1. F

    ESV vs NRSV

    ESV NRSV My comment 1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 1 Now there was a Pharisee named Nicodemus, a leader of the Jews. "man" is actually present and "Pharisees" is plural in the Greek 2 This man came to Jesus [fn] by night and said to him, "Rabbi...
  2. F

    No Sanhedrin in the KJV?

    By your implication, the Bereans were demonstrating a lack of confidence in God's ability to move Paul when they checked his teaching against the Scriptures.
  3. F

    No Sanhedrin in the KJV?

    Would you say then that the king's revisers had no other choices in English other than "council" to put into their translation? I think it is rather rare that the KJV translators use the exact same English word so many times; they prefered a variety of words. Especially in light of the fact...
  4. F

    No Sanhedrin in the KJV?

    Yes, the five examples above (for starters). The NIV, Young, and some other versions do translate with "Sanhedrin" in those verses.
  5. F

    No Sanhedrin in the KJV?

    The Greek word συνέδριον (synedrion, Strong's #4892) occurs over 20 times in the New Testament. It can generically mean any kind of assembly. Yet, this word is never translated (or transliterated) as 'Sanhedrin' in the KJV; this word is always rendered "council" in the KJV. A few KJV examples --...
  6. F

    Common English Bible jumps into top 10

    It is not formal, nor a true paraphrase. When I read the NT earlier this year I found it reminiscent to the CEV or NCV. The TEV, God's Word, and the ISV are likely pretty similar to it also.
  7. F

    Lutheran Synod Spurns NIV2011

    What does that leave us (Green's, Young's, or the ASV)?
  8. F

    From 1916 Regarding The KJV

    When did you start studying the languages of the Scriptures?
  9. F

    From 1916 Regarding The KJV

    Wescott and Hort concerned themselves primarily with the collation of ancient Greek manuscripts, not the editing of an English translation.
  10. F

    MUST we have only one text?

    Welcome to the BB, marke. Since you brought this up, can you explain to me why Paul makes his argument based upon the case number (singularity or plurality) of the word "seed"? The Hebrew word used in Genesis with Abram is zera' (Strong's #2233) and in the 220+ times it occurs in the KJV it is...
  11. F

    MUST we have only one text?

    Why could not the TR be correct in some readings (say, the ending of Mark) but incorrect in other places? Why could not the CT have the original reading sometimes, the MT the original some others, and the TR yet in other places?
  12. F

    MUST we have only one text?

    Huh? The text that is in the CT is in (and text that is out of the CT is out). Sorry, but there is no point in speculating of material with "supposed to be in" status.
  13. F

    New(er) 'version': The Merged Gospels

    I have not read here on the BB about this relatively new (2007) item. The Merged Gospels is a new "literal" translation, formatted two different ways: in parallel columns, and as a continuous narrative. It can be purchased (set your own price, minimum of $10) in printed form, eBook, audio CDs or...
  14. F

    1611 KJV only and anger

    I have stated this before (in so many words): I do not believe that either of these two man-made amalgamations ought to be considered the perfect reconstruction of the original inspired text. Actually, both the CT and the TR exist in several variations; additionally, there are other contending...
  15. F

    1611 KJV only and anger

    Where is markthebaptist now? Today is the fifth quiet day since his last slander; after posting 20+ times on just two days (he hadn't posted before) he hasn't posted since. Winman, it appears your buddy has abandoned you. It is disgusting how some people (who claim to be Christians) will post...
  16. F

    is The NASV still considred as being 'Most Literal" Modern version?

    No; actually the 1901 version was considered the most literal English version (outside of lesser-known 'literal' versions, such as Young's). The ASV is a good version, I liked it better in some respects than the NASBs. Even as old as it is, it suffers little for lack of modern 'advancements'...
  17. F

    1611 KJV only and anger

    Yes, there are other Hebrew words that we often translate as "god" or God" (depending upon the context). But God has only one personal name. I'll try to make what I wrote above even more clear: YHWH, the personal name of God was evidently in use by multiple people, in many places, in various...
  18. F

    1611 KJV only and anger

    It is difficult for me to understand how any one could be taken in by this ridiculous argument. The answer is actually a resounding, NO! I didn't just sit here, I did look it up for myself. First, no person at all in the biblical period of Genesis-Exodus knew God by the English term "LORD"...
Top