A better English Bible.

[37818]

One of the weaknesses that the Byzantine text form is often accused of is the addition of explanatory text (commentary).
The commentary is neither wrong or deceptive, but it would also not be original to the biblical text.

Case by case, needs to be shown to be the case. We have the Holy Spirit witness, do we not? ,1 John 5:7-8, . . . in heaven . . . in earth . . . .

I oppose the add.

 

[37818]

But you did not answer the question, which do you think is the better translation and why?

But I have.

God has identified the correct readings.

And it has not been, and is not merely, a simple all or nothing.

There are, again two main fields of dispute.

What is translated.

How what is translated.

And these are case by case arguments.

 

[Silverhair]

.


You right off argued.

Actually I asked if you had read my post as you did not seem to have understood what I said.


Might one conclude the wrong variants are also of the devil?[/QUOTE]

How do you come to that conclusion. And why do you keep calling them the wrong variants? What in your mind are the correct ones and how do you know that they are the correct ones?

 

[Silverhair]

But I have.

God has identified the correct readings.

And it has not been, and is not merely, a simple all or nothing.

There are, again two main fields of dispute.

What is translated.

How what is translated.

And these are case by case arguments.

And it still comes down to the scholarly opinion of the translator. You have been beating this subject to death for a number of threads now and you still will not accept the obvious answer. There is no way that we can prove what is the correct translation as we do not have the autographs.

 

[Conan]

Most mistake

And it still comes down to the scholarly opinion of the translator. You have been beating this subject to death for a number of threads now and you still will not accept the obvious answer. There is no way that we can prove what is the correct translation as we do not have the autographs.

Maybe he want to discuss the variants and come to conclusions instead of settling for errors? Maybe he is telling people there is a better way?

 

[Silverhair]

Most mistake

Maybe he want to discuss the variants and come to conclusions instead of settling for errors? Maybe he is telling people there is a better way?

Since I am not a Greek scholar and I would conclude that neither 37 or you are then we have to depend upon actual Greek scholars. And as I have pointed out to both of you on various threads the Greek scholars do not agree on which are the beast manuscripts or the best translation so how do you expect us to be able to determine what is the best variant and the correct translation?

He is looking for the ideal and he will not find it.

 

[37818]

How do you come to that conclusion. And why do you keep calling them the wrong variants?

Think. Two different Greek words or phrases.
For example. John 13:2.

By the time supper ended ¦ When it was time for supper CT

Very simple. One reading is correct, the other is not.

Some think it doesn't matter.

Then there is 1 John 5:7.
that testify: 87.3% ¦ who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: ANT TR 0.6%

Many think this is very important on both sides.

 

[37818]

He is looking for the ideal and he will not find it.

Either we actually have a resurrected Savior or it is a bunch of made up stuff, which no one can really know what is written for sure.

 

[Conan]

Since I am not a Greek scholar and I would conclude that neither 37 or you are then we have to depend upon actual Greek scholars. And as I have pointed out to both of you on various threads the Greek scholars do not agree on which are the beast manuscripts or the best translation so how do you expect us to be able to determine what is the best variant and the correct translation?

It can be considered an important issue for some. Instead of depending on scholars, why not learn for yourself. Some have studied this issue for many, many years and have solid beliefs. Have found a way.

He is looking for the ideal and he will not find it.

Maybe he has and wants to share.

 

[Silverhair]

Think. Two different Greek words or phrases.
For example. John 13:2.

By the time supper ended ¦ When it was time for supper CT

Very simple. One reading is correct, the other is not.

Some think it doesn't matter.

Then there is 1 John 5:7.
that testify: 87.3% ¦ who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: ANT TR 0.6%

Many think this is very important on both sides.

You are still missing the point 37. Who is the one to be the final judge as to which is correct. You have beat this horse too death and still can not prove what you want to prove. It is still just your opinion.

As far as the Comma Johanneum is concerned that should not be in dispute.

"For there are three that testify" NSAB
In the first few hundred years of Christianity, there were many theological debates regarding the exact nature and understanding of the Trinity. In all of those debates, no one ever once quoted these words in question from 1 John 5:7-8. If they were originally written by John, it seems very strange that no early Christian would have quoted them. In fact, though none of the ancient Christians quote from this verse, several of them do quote from 1 John 5:6 and 1 John 5:8. Why skip verse seven, especially if it is such a great statement of the Trinity? Guzik

This is all the more significant since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. NET

 

[Silverhair]

Either we actually have a resurrected Savior or it is a bunch of made up stuff, which no one can really know what is written for sure.

Now you are just being foolish. Show me a doctrine that is in dispute or where salvation through faith in the risen Christ is brought into question?

You have your pat translation and keep trying to get everyone to agree with you. You are fighting a loosing battle. Greek scholars do not agree so what hope do you have to get us lay people to do so?

 

[Silverhair]

It can be considered an important issue for some. Instead of depending on scholars, why not learn for yourself. Some have studied this issue for many, many years and have solid beliefs. Have found a way.

Maybe he has and wants to share.

So your suggesting that someone that does not know ancient Greek should decide what is the correct translation?

Those that have studied for years and years are either scholars in their own right or they are depending upon scholars in their studies.

I do understand that 37 wants to share and I commend him for that but he seems to think there is the ideal text out there. That would be the autographs and we do not have them now and will not have them in the future.

 

[37818]

Translation not noted for Mark 2:26,
Abiathar the high priest | Abiathar son of the high priest

 

[37818]

You are still missing the point 37. Who is the one to be the final judge as to which is correct.

The Holy Spirit. 1 John 2:27.

The question that needs to be asked, if that is true, why is this not simply being done?

 

[Conan]

So your suggesting that someone that does not know ancient Greek should decide what is the correct translation?

What is wrong with learning a little about Bible translation?

Those that have studied for years and years are either scholars in their own right or they are depending upon scholars in their studies.

And some will be wrong. Some will not dig deep enough.

I do understand that 37 wants to share and I commend him for that but he seems to think there is the ideal text out there. That would be the autographs and we do not have them now and will not have them in the future.

How can you seriously say we don't have perfect copies of John 1:1-17? There are vast areas of the New Testament where all edited Greek Texts agree no matter what backgrounds and differences in other smaller areas.

 

[Conan]

1 John 2:27.
Sorry I thought it would make a link to the Scripture.

 

[37818]

1 John 2:27, But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

 

[Silverhair]

The Holy Spirit. 1 John 2:27.

The question that needs to be asked, if that is true, why is this not simply being done?

For that answer you would have to speak to the translators or those that published the bible. You use the KJV so do you agree with the text being included?

 

[Silverhair]

What is wrong with learning a little about Bible translation?


And some will be wrong. Some will not dig deep enough.


How can you seriously say we don't have perfect copies of John 1:1-17? There are vast areas of the New Testament where all edited Greek Texts agree no matter what backgrounds and differences in other smaller areas.

Nothing wrong with learning a bit about bible translation but to think you can tell others what is the correct translation is wrong. A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I was speaking of the whole bible. You seem to have missed that point.

 

[37818]

You use the KJV so do you agree with the text being included?

I know in fact some of the textual readings are not correct. But most New Testament readings have been correct. The modern CT readings are now known to be wrong.