Correcting the Bible on the Fly

Sounds as though you have not shared your faith with anyone who is well educated in other areas of life to write what you did. There are non-believers I have met you would challenge some well educated Christians.

Why profess ignorance when you can study and be strengthened by God's Word and help to feed others with the truth.

About one year ago I was was witnessing to a young man and he knew much more about translation than the vast majority of pastors. During the conversation he indicated how dumb some were in their endeavor to sound right yet mislead people. I happen to have agreed with him in everything he said. Once we got past that I had a lot of time to share with him. In fact after that he sought to work with me on the job.

Ignorance wins nobody. It just promotes more ignorance. God has never used ignorance as a virtue to witness to others.

So let's get it right and not be content with ignorance.

 

Attention KJVOs. You may want to copy these statements to be used when the assertion is made that, "No one is attacking the KJV itself, we're just attacking KJVonlyism." </font>[/QUOTE]Moderator note: This comment was noted, but the poster was VERY careful not to name a specific version, allowing himself to retort "How do you know I was talking about the KJV?" The post referred to comes very close to violating the "spirit of the law." Please also note that the second statement has been edited to read:

Please use the "Report Post" button instead of quoting material you find offensive. That makes virtually impossible to edit out all of the references to it.

Roger
C4K
Moderator

[ March 03, 2005, 01:39 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

Sounds as though you have not shared your faith with anyone who is well educated in other areas of life to write what you did. There are non-believers I have met you would challenge some well educated Christians.

Why profess ignorance when you can study and be strengthened by God's Word and help to feed others with the truth.

About one year ago I was was witnessing to a young man and he knew much more about translation than the vast majority of pastors. During the conversation he indicated how dumb some were in their endeavor to sound right yet mislead people. I happen to have agreed with him in everything he said. Once we got past that I had a lot of time to share with him. In fact after that he sought to work with me on the job.

Ignorance wins nobody. It just promotes more ignorance. God has never used ignorance as a virtue to witness to others.

So let's get it right and not be content with ignorance. </font>[/QUOTE]__________________________________________________

Did he get saved? If not then you wasted your time. We are NOT sent to get the world to agree with us, nor are we to agree with the worldlings.
We are sent to preach Christ and Him crucified. In your anecdote you made NO mention of
a) whether you preached the cross
b) whether he got saved, then or later
"He indicated how dumb some were...and I agreed with him."
I submit that all you did was bring reproach on that blessed Name.
Your no-so-veiled attack on my education or experience witnessing did not fall on deaf/blind ears/eyes. You, sir, are a real treat to talk with sometimes.

WHO professed ignorance?
clicky-ignore...
In HIS service;
Jim

 

I had a roommate in college that was from Greece and he was able to read a Greek NT somewhat slower than modern Greek.

Why should I waste my time studying a translation if I have the tools necessary to study the original languages. English is much more ambiguous then Greek and Hebrew.

Very often I can answer a question that a person has without any commentary with a Greek NT whereas I would spend much more time if I could only look at an English Bible. The comparison is like going into a room lit by a 25 watt light bulb versus one lit by a 300 watt light bulb.

When you begin to study and understand Greek you will see how wrong you are.

The door to a culture is through its language. An English translation does nothing to get the picture of the way words are used and the ways sentences are constructed. Much of the NT is worded as a Jewish person who spoke Greek as a second language would write.

For example Hebrew does not have a word for wife. The sentence is phrased as the woman of him or the woman of a man's name. The English never shows that.

For example if I want to research out how the word for baptize is used I can do that. I can take a look at how that word was used at the same time the NT was written and the LXX translated too. Sometime try tracing the word for baptize from the beginning of the OT into the intertestamental period and past the time of the NT. English never existed then so it cannot be done in English.

From the Introduction to An Interlinear Literal Translation of the Greek New Testament by George Ricker Berry, Ph.D.

The Value of Hebrew and Greek to the Clergyman

1. Without some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, you cannot understand the critical commentaries of the Scripture, and a commentary that is not critical is of doubtful value.

2. Without some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, you cannot satisfy yourself . . as to the changes which you will find in the Revised Old and New Testament.

3. Without some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, you cannot appreciate the critical discussions relating to the Books of the Old and New Testament.

4. Without some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, you cannot be certain that in your sermon based on a Scripture text, you are presenting the correct teaching of that text.

5. Without some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, you cannot be an independent student or a reliable interpreter of the Word of God.

6. As much knowledge of Hebrew can be secured in one year with the aid of an Interlinear Old Testament as can be gained of Latin in three years. Greek, though somewhat more difficult, may be readily acquired with the aid of an Interlinear New Testament/Lexicon.

7. The Hebrew language has, in all, 7000 words, and of them 1000 are repeated over 25 times each in the Old Testament.

8. Hebrew grammar has but one form of the Relative pronoun in all cases, numbers and genders; by three forms for the Demonstrative pronoun. The possible verbal forms are about 300 as compared with the 1200 found in Greek. It has practically no declension.

9. Within ten years, the average man wastes more time in fruitless reading and indifferent talk, that would be used in acquiring a good working knowledge of Hebrew and Greek that in turn would impart to his teaching that quality of independence and of reliability which so greatly enhances one's power as a teacher.

10. There is not one minister in ten who might not if he but would, find time and opportunity for such study of Hebrew and Greek as would enable him to make a thoroughly practical use of it in his work as a Bible-preacher and Bible-teacher.

Anyone can argue but those of us who know the difference cannot explain it to someone who would not understand what the difference is. It is much like trying to explain light to a blind person.

Many years ago I was a student under one of the top woodworkers in the world. The master had some of his work in the Smithsonian Institute. In the class was a man who regularly criticized the master's work and designs. What all of us noticed was that his was the poorest work of everyone in the school. Eventually they told him to leave and accepted another student in his place. 21 of us were there to learn all we could from the master who had proven himself. But one was there to criticize the master's work and learned very little. He was also a nuisance to the rest of the students.

Now you can learn from those who have been down the road or you can continue to criticize. It's much like a child trying to lead the parent.

 

No, Mr. Mike, I don't think of them as "corrections" as you put it. It's a way of expounding on the text. What's wrong with using synonyms to teach, further explain the text? And sure, synonyms abound if you compare versions. You're sure likely to hit in one of the versions that the synonym that your preacher might have used to explain the word.
That's what "teaching" "preaching" is, right?

btw, great to have found a fellow coursemate! We've been on FBI for five semesters now and we've been so blessed!

 

I totally disagree with everything that G.R.Berry said. Why?
For this reason alone;
"5. Without some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, you cannot be an independent student or a reliable interpreter of the Word of God."
The man who made this satement is perhaps the MOST arrogant man I have ever had the displeasure to read.
How dare He assume that my God is incapable of enlightening the man who prayerfully approaches the English Bible on his knees seeking God's face!
MY GOD is able! With or without the scholars!
It has been done for me 394 years ago. All I gotta do it TRUST AND OBEY!

You sir, have been easily deceived.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Sounds as though you have not shared your faith with anyone who is well educated in other areas of life to write what you did. There are non-believers I have met you would challenge some well educated Christians.

Why profess ignorance when you can study and be strengthened by God's Word and help to feed others with the truth.

About one year ago I was was witnessing to a young man and he knew much more about translation than the vast majority of pastors. During the conversation he indicated how dumb some were in their endeavor to sound right yet mislead people. I happen to have agreed with him in everything he said. Once we got past that I had a lot of time to share with him. In fact after that he sought to work with me on the job.

Ignorance wins nobody. It just promotes more ignorance. God has never used ignorance as a virtue to witness to others.

So let's get it right and not be content with ignorance. </font>[/QUOTE]__________________________________________________

Did he get saved? If not then you wasted your time. We are NOT sent to get the world to agree with us, nor are we to agree with the worldlings.
We are sent to preach Christ and Him crucified. In your anecdote you made NO mention of
a) whether you preached the cross
b) whether he got saved, then or later
"He indicated how dumb some were...and I agreed with him."
I submit that all you did was bring reproach on that blessed Name.
Your no-so-veiled attack on my education or experience witnessing did not fall on deaf/blind ears/eyes. You, sir, are a real treat to talk with sometimes.

WHO professed ignorance?
clicky-ignore...
In HIS service;
Jim </font>[/QUOTE]I would submit to you that it was ignorant folks who shamed the name of Christ and told him a lie and ignored his questions. In fact one of those he met was from a KJVO church in the local area. He was focused on how stupid some Christians can be instead of Christ. They did not point him to Christ but rather to themselves. He also know a lot about some other things because his dad is a well know attorney.

You act as though you have all the answers. But the scripture speaks differently.

Have you forgotten what Jesus said to the religious folks? They did not know the scriptures nor the power of God. Have you forgotten how Paul dealt with some in Acts to get them to listen. Sometime you have to spend some time clearing raod blocks to get them down the road and pointed ot Christ.

So you only share your faith with those who come to Christ? Try reading your Bible some time so you will know what the Bible says about when we are to share our faith. In season and out of season?

 

How well educated do you think Paul was? Just a whole lot more than most of us. Did God use him?

 

More on the exegesis of Ruth.
Let's start with my incredibly stupid mistake. I had Naomi 'seduce' Boaz instead of Ruth.
Not even 50 and senility is setting in already.


manchester
"what does it mean that she "made herself known" to the man? And what does it mean that she uncovered his "foot"? And in what manner did he act as a kinsman redeemer? "
"
They are all sexual euphemisms of a sort.
Especially interesting is the bit where she uncovers his 'foot'. Foot, legs and liver are all 3 euphemisms in Hebrew for that bodypart that will get me banned if I mention it.
The duties of a kinsman redeemer relevant for this discussion are covered in Deuteronnomium 25:5-10. Yes they include fathering an heir.
But Manchester I suspect you already knew all of this.

Pastor_Bob&Plain ol' Ralph
"This is the most ludicrous exegesis of a verse of Scripture that I have ever heard of."
'
and ofcourse that timeless classic response.
'
"Failure to understand the traditons of that time helps to render falsehoods such as yours."
"
Manchester's questions cover the reasons rooted in the traditions of the time for this exegesis much better than any answer I could supply.


"I'd seriously consider another church."
"
I live on another continent, the nearest church that meets your approval may very well be located in Florida.

In all honesty let's admit that in the end my church's headpastor does not prepare his sermons about the OT from that brilliant translation the KJB.
He makes do with the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia...

 

If the pastor says, "this translation uses the word 'murder' but going back to the original Greek this means 'love,' so it's actually telling you to love your brother rather than to murder him," that is correcting the text. If the English text used does not represent the Greek text, out of intentional or accidental misrepresentation or a change in the meaning of the English over time, that's correction. If the English words are incorrect, it's correction to give the correct translation.

 

av1611jim: "How dare He assume that my God is incapable of enlightening the man who prayerfully approaches the English Bible on his knees seeking God's face!"

Amen, Brother av1611jim - Preach it!

of course, it would be truer said:

How dare He assume that my God is incapable of enlightening the man who prayerfully approaches any of the over 200 valid English Bibles on his knees seeking God's face!

God did not limit himself even to one and only one KJV Bible. I have three KJV Bibles in paper and two electronicly.

2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV1611 edition):
Studie to shewe thy selfe approued vnto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly diuiding the word of trueth.

Have you rightly diuided the word of trueth today?

 

Who were those men who did it for you? Are you reading the work of the educated or the work of the average person at the time?

Is God using the resulting work (the KJV translation) of the educated or the ignorant in your personal life for you to know God better?

 

The KJV translators had also to justify why they used the Greek and Hebrew: Their answer:

Yes, He has done it in the past (1605-1611) with 40-50 of the best scholars of the day most of whom were educated in the institutions of higher learning of both the Anglo and Roman Catholic churches.

One simply cannot prove which KJV revision/edition is the “perfect” Word of God.

Which revision/edition (1613, 1629, 1638, 1744, 1762, 1769, 1853) is The "perfect" Word of God (things which are different are not the same) since in 1613 these men issued their first revision with error corrections followed by several others revisions over the years?

Please note that the archetype English copy of the 1611 KJV was lost circa 1647 and the KJV translators had no choice then but to use the original language texts to make their corrections.

BTW, 394 years ago, King James had the Apocrypha included in the middle of the “Holy Bible’ without one word in the 1611 First Edition that it was not canonical. He also made it a crime to print a Bible without the Apocrypha. Do we “trust and obey” the Apocrypha included in the AV from 394 years ago?


HankD

 

This is not the appropriate forum to discuss this, so I'll make my remarks brief, and give you the option of beginning a new thread in the proper forum for further discussion.

There is nothing in this passage of an improper sexual nature. Ruth's actions were performed to remind Boaz of his duty as the near kinsman redeemer. Nowhere does the Bible say that she uncovered his "foot." It says she uncovered his "feet," and the word "feet" means the actual feet. There is no reference to any other part of the body.

When she "uncovered his feet," she lay at the foot of his bed and covered herself with that portion of Boaz's garment or blanket. Verse 8 tells us where she was laying when Boaz awoke in the night.

When she told him to "spread therefore thy skirt over thine handmaid; for thou art a near kinsman," she was merely requesting that he take her under his wing and give her protection as his wife.

There was nothing improper or indecent about this beautiful picture of redemption.

 

__________________________________________________

I find this comment very revealing.
In essence you said one IS the word of God and the other ISN'T. On the other hand, you, yourself have used this quote to REFUTE KJVo;
"Now to the latter we answer, That we do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."

HMMMMM

I have God's WORDS in my language. Perhaps by your own statement you think you don't.
I am sad for you.

In HIS service;
Jim

[ March 03, 2005, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: av1611jim ]

 

And NONE of this addresses my comments in my previous post.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

What about the Apocrypha they translated and included in the "Holy Bible" without one word in that Bible that it is/was non-canonical?

HankD

 

What about it Hank?
Can you honestly tell me if your maps are canonical?

This is a tired old non-argument.

In HIS service;
Jim