Bible Version Questions

[Salamander]

But when someone is told and proven that they are in error (saying the NKJV is NOT from the same Greek as the AV1611) and they will not believe the truth but perpetuate error over and over and over . . it is de facto lying.

And attacking a good translation of the Word of God. You put up with stalking, but I will not tolerate willful lying.

The NKJV translatorssuper-imposed "God" for a male in Job 24:22. The KJB translators got it right, so at least the NKJV translators detoured away from the TR in just that one place. The claim is valid.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

The NKJV translatorssuper-imposed "God" for a male in Job 24:22. The KJB translators got it right, so at least the NKJV translators detoured away from the TR in just that one place. The claim is valid.

Wow! And all this time I though the TR was NT Greek.

Which version of the TR has Job?

 

[Dr. Bob]

Everyone does, I trust, understand that the AV translators did NOT use the TR Greek text (which didn't exist for nearly 20 more years). There own records show they used a special blend on Greek texts that was then "lost" to the next generation.

For accuracy to the claim at the NKJV used the "same" Greek text, the NKJV translators scrupulously worked backward from the AV itself to be sure they were going back to the exact blend of Greek texts used 400 years ago. Good reading to peruse their meticulous work on being sure they DID have exactly 100% the same Greek choices.

Thankfully, they put them in modern English so ploughboys could understand.

 

[2serve]

2serve,

We are talking about the New Testament, you are talking about the Old Testament.

TR=Greek New Testament

Biblia Hebraica, Septuagint et.el = Old Testament

Correct me if I'm wrong.
Tom

That's interesting. When I went to school you got in trouble for not listening in class.

OK class! who heard me suggest that I was talking only of the New Testament? Anybody; Anybody; Beuler; Anybody?

 

[franklinmonroe]

That's interesting. When I went to school you got in trouble for not listening in class.

OK class! who heard me suggest that I was talking only of the New Testament? Anybody; Anybody; Beuler; Anybody?

Go back a read the OP; it is essentially about questions concerning the difference between the Textus Receptus (TR) and the "Alexandrian" Greek texts. That is, this is a New Testament topic.

 

[franklinmonroe]

Not true! Non-TR -- Nearly 800 times!

How many times does the AV's New Testament depart from the TR (the editions published before 1611)?

 

[franklinmonroe]

How many times does the AV's New Testament depart from the TR (the editions published before 1611)?

Whatsamatter? Is this question toooo difficult? If it can be shown that the AV departs from the 'TR' just one time, then this ridiculous argument goes away, right?

 

[stilllearning]

Hi Nicholas25

The questions you asked in your original post, were quickly and accurately answered by Askjo in response #8.
(Take his answers to heart, and don’t let anybody turn you from the truth.)
--------------------------------------------------
But I found Ed Edwards response, to Askjo’s answers, very interesting.

He said.........

“There are over 30,000 posts in the versions/translations Forum - I suspect at least 20,000 of them rebuking the type comments above.”

In other words, “If most people believe something, than it must be right”.

 

[Mexdeaf]

I don't see nothing "quick" or "accurate" here... lemme clean my glasses and try again... nope, ain't there.

I know the KJV is the only Bible version around that comes from the Textus Recptus.

Correct.

Why do you think NONE of the more modern versions come from it?

They are from Alexandrian texts.

Would it be possible that the Bible versions through the years (KJV and prior) that came from the Textus Receptus were kept around by God because it is the better, best, or only true Bible/manuscript?

That is how we get the true Bible. William Tyndale was a martyr. He prayed to God, “Open the King of England’s eye.” God answered his prayer. That is how we get the KJV. The KJV is most accurate translation for English-speaking people. The KJV was derived from 5210 of 5255 MSS -- 99%.

Why are so many verses not in the Alexandrian Text type versions?

Gnostics and heretics mutilated many Scriptures in them. That is how modern versions followed their method.

What do you think about the theory that the Alexandrian Text was found in good shape and found to be older, because no one wanted to use them because they were wrong/corrupt?

Between the date of autographs of the OT and the NT and the date of B and Aleph MSS separated 300+ years away. Alexandrian texts were produced by heretics and Gnostics. Those Alexandrian texts were wrong and corrupt because they were not used for many years like that you left stuffs in attic for long time or throw them in trash.

The theory says the Textus Receptus is just as old, but because it was used frequently, many copies were ruined.

Correct. Heretics destroyed many preserved copies from the beginning. Polycarp had apographs (meaning, “copies”) of the autographs. When he wrote his letters to Philippians church, his quotations in his letters were found in copies of the autographs 50 times. When he was a martyr, they were ruined. However His letters to Philippians church were not destroyed. An example of Romans 14:10 saying, “for we shall stand before the judgment seat of CHRIST” is found in his letters. Modern versions changed from “CHRIST” to God. The KJV has this phrase on this verse and identified with the wording of the autographs.

I do not think a Bible version has anything to do with salvation because that would be legalism, but do you think there is any chance at all that we could stand before the Lord one day and have to answer for our choice of Bible versions?

Our Lord will judge anyone who produced their new corrupted versions against the warnings from the Scriptures. For example, King Jehoiahkim mutilated the Scriptures. God commanded Jeremiah to re-write God’s Words. Another example is Polycarp (69-155 AD) who was a disciple of the Apostle John and a martyr. He warned, “whoever perverts the sayings of the Lord, that one is firstborn of Satan” and “those who pervert the oracles of the Lord…let us return the word which has been handed down to us from the beginning.”

 

[Mexdeaf]

Hi Nicholas25

The questions you asked in your original post, were quickly and accurately answered by Askjo in response #8.
(Take his answers to heart, and don’t let anybody turn you from the truth.)
--------------------------------------------------
But I found Ed Edwards response, to Askjo’s answers, very interesting.

He said.........

In other words, “If most people believe something, than it must be right”.

That shoe fits the "Only" crowd a whole lot better than it does the rest of us. :laugh:

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

With 800 supposed strayings of the NKJV from the TR seems like someone could show me 5-6.

 

[Dr. Bob]

C4 - Maybe the "supposed" differences from the TR are the same as the places where the AV1611 differed from the TR.

It is funny that the TR bunch still think THAT blend of documents must be the best and must be the one used by the AV. If they were so enamored with the AV, perhaps they should actually understand a tad bit of history!!

:laugh:

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

C4 - Maybe the "supposed" differences from the TR are the same as the places where the AV1611 differed from the TR.

It is funny that the TR bunch still think THAT blend of documents must be the best and must be the one used by the AV. If they were so enamored with the AV, perhaps they should actually understand a tad bit of history!!

:laugh:

Well, I do know of a dozen or so places where the AV diverged - maybe you are right and that is where the NKJV diverged as well.

 

[Rippon]

Hi Nicholas25

The questions you asked in your original post, were quickly and accurately answered by Askjo in response #8.
(Take his answers to heart, and don’t let anybody turn you from the truth.

Asko accurate?Not quite.

Stilllearning,please learn from another source.

 

[SeekingTruth]

Posting Rules

3. Show grace to the other posters. When someone disagrees with you, discuss it; but be slow to offend, and eager to get into the Word and find the answers. Remember, when discussing passionate issues, it is easy to go too far and offend. Further, if we are "earnestly contending for the faith" it would be unrealistic not to expect at times to be misunderstood or even ridiculed. But please note that your words can sometimes be harsh if used in the wrong way. The anger of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
4. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. The board has an edit button enabled. We encourage you to use it and edit your own words. Moderators and Administrators will be visibly proactive in dealing with potentially offensive situations. Posts of a violent or threatening nature, either implicitly or explicitly, will be deleted, and the poster's membership revoked. We encourage personal problems with other members be resolved privately via email or personal messaging. (Emphasis added.)

Is calling another poster a liar a lack of grace and a personal attack? Or are administrators exempt from the rules of the Board?

 

[Ed Edwards]

I wondered how far I could get comparing two earlier English Bibles before I found a difference. I got to the second verse:

Gen 1:2 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):
And the earth was without forme
and void, and darkenesse was vpon the deepe,
and the Spirit of God mooued vpon the waters.

Gen 1:2 (KJV1611 Edition):
And the earth was without forme,
and voyd, and darkenesse was vpon the face of the deepe:
and the Spirit of God mooued vpon the face of the waters.

I put bold the terms that the KJV1611 Translators added to the Bible, 2 occurrences of 'the face of'.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Is calling another poster a liar a lack of grace and a personal attack? Or are administrators exempt from the rules of the Board?

When they know the truth and then lie, I think calling them out on their lies is a good step short of suspending them.

This isn't a matter of "interpretation" or "doctrine", like whether one holds to eternal security or not, or is a-mill v pre-mill. We allow great liberty and show great tolerance even if we think someone is totally wrong. But this is lying and is should not be tolerated on the BB.

I'm trying to be gracious.

 

[robycop3]

Still Learning:The questions you asked in your original post, were quickly and accurately answered by Askjo in response #8.
(Take his answers to heart, and don’t let anybody turn you from the truth.)

No, he didn't answer with complete accuracy, and in some answers, NO accuracy.

In particular is the one about the theory that Sinaiticus, etc. were in good condition cuz they hadn't been used. All that shows is that PARTICULAR COPY hadn't been worn out . Who knows how many copies were made, used, & turned to dust before our time?

 

[Dale-c]

When they know the truth and then lie, I think calling them out on their lies is a good step short of suspending them.

This isn't a matter of "interpretation" or "doctrine", like whether one holds to eternal security or not, or is a-mill v pre-mill. We allow great liberty and show great tolerance even if we think someone is totally wrong. But this is lying and is should not be tolerated on the BB.

Take me for example, I was raised believing in KJV onlyism. I was honestly mistaken. I really believed what I had been taught was true.

When I studied for myself I and saw the truth, I had two choices:
Change my belief and no longer be mistaken or:
Keep my beliefs and no longer be honest.


The KJO position is one of the most baseless beliefs I have ever come across.

One thing I struggle with is that when pastors refuse to admit the error of this position it casts a bad light on all the do.
It is hard to trust someone who will perpetuate errors like this.

 

[stilllearning]

Hi Dale-c

Nice response.

You said.......

“When I studied for myself and saw the truth, I had two choices:......”

What exactly did you study, that showed you the truth?
(I would really like to know!)