Featured Some Singular Readings In The NIV...

It is impossible to approach Koine Greek without realising that it differs (not hugely, but somewhat) from Classical Greek. The translators of the KJV must have been well aware of that. You have only to read both in the original to understand that they are not the same.

 

If you believe I have said something sinful, report it. Otherwise, stop bleating. Even better, put me on ignore if my posts are so offensive to you.

 

I did read it. I think he's wrong.
To clarify, there were certain things that the KJV translators could not have known. They were unaware, for example, of the Granville Sharp rule, because it was not propounded until the end of the 18th Century. This accounts for the faulty KJV renderings of Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1.
But to say that they were unaware of the differences between Classical and Koine Greek is to represent them as mindless boobies, which they were most certainly not. You cannot read the Greek NT without being aware of them.

 

I shake in my boots.

 

Bump. Or have you selectively put this question on 'ignore'?

 

They were the best scholars in the Hebrew/Greek of their time, so no fault of their own, as they were not privy to the Sharp rule, nor to the older manuscripts, but were indeed clear on distinction between Biblical and classical Greek!

 

McGrath contradicts himself, and fails to produce any evidence to back up his claims.
First of all, having studied classical Greek at University, and then having studied Koine Greek when I was saved, I can say that the differences between Classical and Kione are not huge but they are clear. To say that the KJV translators would not have been aware of the differences to just plain wrong.
Next, he says,

'The language of the workplace and the market is thus subtly changed into the high cadences of the places of Westminster....etc.'
Yet on Page 254, he says,
'Yet there is no evidence that the translators of the KJV had any great interest in matters of literature or linguistic development. Their concern was primarily to provide an accurate translation of the Bible.. Paradoxically, the king's translators achieved literary distinction precisely because they were not deliberately pursuing it..........The central objective of the king's translators was scholarly accuracy-- the finding of proper English words and phrases to render the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic.'

Next, McGrath gives no examples of the 'high cadences' etc. of which he accuses the KJV translators. However, in the paragraph immediately before that quoted by Rippon (Page 238), he writes,

'An example may help illuminate the point being made. In classical Greek, the word apantesis bears the general meaning of 'meeting.' The King james translators used this translation without any particular hesitations, as it made sense in every case-- for example as in Luke's account of the Roman Christians coming out to meet Paul as he travelled along the Appian Way (Acts 28:15).
'And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as the Appii Forum, and the three taverns:
Although this translation is not misleading, it fails to appreciate the developed use of the word apantesis at the time. The word now bore the sense of "an official welcome for a distinguished visitor who has just arrived"............Luke's narrative , therefore, indicates that the Roman Christians travelled to meet Paul along the Appian Way in order to give him the kind of distinguished welcome reserved for persons of great importance-- a point that the King James Bible fails to bring out.'

It is quite correct that since the production of the KJV, hundreds of Greek manuscripts, both classical and koine, have been discovered and in some cases this has led to a better understanding of the meaning of individual words. However, let's look at Acts 28:15 in various translations and see what improvements have been wrought by the new understanding of apantesis. We are looking specifically at the word 'meet.'

KJV: 'And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as the Appii Forum, and the three taverns.'
NKJV. 'And from there, when the brethren heard about us, they came to meet us as far as Appii Forum and Three Inns.'
ESV. 'And the brothers there, when they heard about us, came as far as the Forum of Appius and Three Taverns to meet us.'
NIV (1984). 'The brothers there had heard that we were coming, and they travelled as far as the Forum of Appius and the Three Taverns to meet us.'
NASB. 'And the brethren, when they heard about us, came as far as the Market of Appius and Three Inns to meet us.'

Isn't it strange that none of these modern translators have made use of this 'new developed use of the word apantesis'?

 

Just to be absolutely clear, that is exactly what I meant by my use of the words 'muck about' and I stand by it. There are no sexual connotations in the words as per Rippon. That is a product of his fevered imagination.

 

Bump again.