-
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!
175 Versions?
- Thread starter Baptist4life
- Start date
- Status
David Michael Harris
Active Member
FF Bruce did a translation ( maybe just the NT ) and I have never come across it? Wonder why? Maybe for sale one day!
I certainly would like a copy.
I certainly would like a copy.
David Michael Harris
Active Member
I think Micheal Marlowe is working on a NT one over at Bible Researcher
David Michael Harris
Active Member
Yes, godless. Absolutely no respect for the One True God. These are the ones that prefer darkness rather than light, if they do not come to the light they will die in their sins. And be lost.
I think of Jonah and his refusal to go preach.
I'm putting my order for one in now!
franklinmonroe
Active Member
You are probably referring to Bruce's Expanded Paraphrase of the Epistles of Paul (1981). There is an inexpensive copy available on Alibris currently.
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Clearly these are attempts to list unique translations; a list of the marketed iterations of the NIV text over the years (just for example) would likely yield hundreds: large print, study editions, compact, etc. Unfortunately, most list makers do not put forth enough effort to prevent duplication of the same Bible text under different titles.
In part that is why several years ago I was working on my own list; but it is a tedious and difficult task. My focus was only on separate English translations of the complete NT newly published since 1900 (about 200). Including all printed English NTs in the prior centuries approximately adds another 200. There have been many partial English translations: single books (Psalms is popular), groups (often the Pentateuch, or Gospels), and unfinished/incomplete testaments (frequently Revelation is left undone). It depends upon how one counts them, but the total number of published English translation projects (of at least one complete book) is certainly over 500.
Harold Garvey
New Member
I suppose that a shharp rebuke and replacing the prop with another book would have been out of order? It just might have opened a door of opportunity!
Harold Garvey
New Member
Ok, so there are Bibles in other languages, what else is new? THERE ARE MANY WHO HAVE NO BIBLE IN THEIR LANGUAGE. This thread is about English versions and why so many? A clear concise observation is that other versions using different wordings cause a disconcerting unfamiliararity with the most renowned mainstay verses and passages. This can and does cause confusion. Of course this will be denied and multiple excuses will be made in support of "easier to read versions", but why depart from literary excellence when even the most illiterate have come to know these verses in the KJV? Most recognize them at a glance, knowing what they are about. [Off topic]
Last edited by a moderator:
To be truly in the KJV language, that would be "vulgar tongue" as per the translators of the KJV.
"Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which is deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, "Read this, I pray thee," he was fain to make this answer, "I cannot, for it is sealed." [Isa 29:11]"
"But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar."
From "The Translators to the Reader" in the KJV 1611.
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Mod note:
Folks please don't respond to attempts to derail this thread with agenda driven posts. Report them so that I don't have to work so hard to clean up the thread.
Folks please don't respond to attempts to derail this thread with agenda driven posts. Report them so that I don't have to work so hard to clean up the thread.
(off topic)
In regards to the OP, the reason there have been so many translations over time is because the English language has a long history, and has evolved quickly. It continues to do so. It would be interesting to see how many of the versions addressed in the OP are strictly Modern English (which would probably eliminate most translations prior to the late 1700's), and then eliminate those to bibles in current print (which would probably eliminate about 50% of the remaining ones).
In regards to the OP, the reason there have been so many translations over time is because the English language has a long history, and has evolved quickly. It continues to do so. It would be interesting to see how many of the versions addressed in the OP are strictly Modern English (which would probably eliminate most translations prior to the late 1700's), and then eliminate those to bibles in current print (which would probably eliminate about 50% of the remaining ones).
Last edited by a moderator:
Bible versions list
See a list of 306 English language versions through 2008 at the following link:
http://www.AV7.org/compare
Additions and corrections will be much appreciated.
See a list of 306 English language versions through 2008 at the following link:
http://www.AV7.org/compare
Additions and corrections will be much appreciated.
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Yes, English versions. In this context "version" means a translation. The inspired words of God are preserved in Hebrew and Greek scriptures, of which our 'Bibles' are translations. There is no evidence to conclude that any particular English text is the only one that should ever represent that original language text.
Good men (Tyndale, Rogers, etc.) thought that further translating was necessary. Several English translations pre-existed the KJV. The Geneva text was widely accepted; Lancelot Andrews continued to preach from the Geneva Bible well after the publication of the AV. Are you suggesting that the emergence of the KJV text added to "confusion" in 1611?
Last edited by a moderator:
RaptureReady
New Member
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. - Hebrews 11:1
If what your saying is that the inspired words of God are only in the Hebrew and Greek, would God not want us to have enough faith in him to preserve them to today? I would assume in the English language since its probably is the most known language today.
BTW, hello everyone!
Harold Garvey
New Member
Isn't it strange N
NE has EVER said what you refer to?You insert other languages as a suggestion and then revert right back to English only versions.
No, and with time nearly every person holding to the Geneva made the switch. Invent reasons all you wish, but consistency in the KJV proves it to be the most familiar and the mainstay of noticable verses when given to the general public.
A plethora of versions has done nothing but scatter the troops. It has also caused strifes amongst the ranks to disconcert the efforts of the church. Just to whom is it then attributed this characteristic? Would you really want to attribute these results to God?:type:
Harold Garvey
New Member
Hi! And see you on the way up!
How is it these demand everyone subscribe to their knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek and expect everyone to just get in line with that reasoning?
Do they really intend to educate everyone in these tongues before winning them to Christ? Or do they win them and then expect to teach them and just WHERE is this command from the word of God to teach all men these tongues and baptize them?:type:
- Status