Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Does My Bible Read That Way?
`/23/2012 | Count-your -change

Posted on 01/23/2012 3:27:12 PM PST by count-your-change

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
Though I prefer the paper and ink books in my hands the internet has proved to be a remarkably useful tool for the Bible researcher at relatively low cost.
1 posted on 01/23/2012 3:27:16 PM PST by count-your-change
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

It’s fortunate that virtually all of these manuscript differences (and I appreciate bible translations that note them as footnotes on the same page as the main text used) either amount to synonyms or equivalencies that are known from other scriptures to be true, or arguably omitted words that are still acceptable from other scriptures. Probably the difference that brings up the most practical controversy is the set of “snake handling” verses at the end of the Textus Receptus of Mark. And many of those who accept it do not think it would apply commonly in modern times, if at all — it is talking about exceptional witnesses, and probably by apostles.

Anyhow, a bible with these footnotes is very helpful when listening to a preacher preach from them. If the preacher becomes dogmatic about a certain disputed reading, there should be a good reason for it.


2 posted on 01/23/2012 3:38:18 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

I don’t remember the exact verse, but there’s also one where the King James says “shall be born of a virgin”, and the other ones say “born of a young woman”, or something like that. That’s enough reason for me to stick with the King James!


3 posted on 01/23/2012 3:40:55 PM PST by Slump Tester (What if I'm pregnant Teddy? Errr-ahh -Calm down Mary Jo, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Anyhow, a bible with these footnotes is very helpful when listening to a preacher preach from them

(I mean, from passages which are affected in this manner).

It’s rather interesting to note that of all the biblical books, the one that has the most dire warning in it about alterations (i.e. Revelation) also has virtually no variant manuscripts, though there is still dispute about the meaning of certain passages. Perhaps scribes respected that over other books.


4 posted on 01/23/2012 3:43:55 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slump Tester

This is the Hebrew term “alma” which actually means both or either depending on the context in which it is found. She would be, normally, a young never married woman who is a virgin and preparing to be married.

One problem with most King James versions is that they never note the existing manuscript variants even as footnotes. They stick dogmatically to the Textus Receptus.


5 posted on 01/23/2012 3:47:22 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Slump Tester
"That’s enough reason for me to stick with the King James!"

I agree with you. I don't find King James' version of the English language that difficult to understand. What I do find difficult to understand is "today's" version of the language that you'll find in text messages and the like. While I understand the desire to be brief, I find it more important to be understood.

6 posted on 01/23/2012 3:49:19 PM PST by davisfh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
Douay-Rheims
 
John 1: 18 No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

7 posted on 01/23/2012 3:53:50 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

Beware of false certitudes, however — not noting existence of historically significant manuscripts doesn’t mean they did not exist.

(The example of “alma” isn’t a manuscript problem. The New American Standard, and the following revisions which dropped the pious thees and thous where God is addressed, take the orthodox meaning of this passage, and still note the variant manuscripts in other places.)


8 posted on 01/23/2012 3:54:05 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Here is a book I found to be both very useful and readable on this subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-English-Bible-Translation-Essentially/dp/1433502798/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1327362057&sr=8-3


9 posted on 01/23/2012 3:57:30 PM PST by Willgamer (Rex Lex or Lex Rex?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davisfh

U dnt wnt a Bbl n Txtese? :-)


10 posted on 01/23/2012 3:59:21 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

http://genevabible.com/

Prior to the KJV


11 posted on 01/23/2012 4:03:45 PM PST by silentreignofheroes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

I like the New King James version. Fixes the mistakes of the old one.


12 posted on 01/23/2012 4:05:56 PM PST by Free Vulcan (Election 2012 - America stands or falls. No more excuses. Get involved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

Although I’m a Catholic, I’m also a student of English literature. I usually prefer to quote the King James Version. If there’s a problem with any particular verse, I would make note of it.

I also like the Revised Standard Version, but it has largely been replaced by the New Revised Standard Version, another politically correct mistranslation like most of the rest.

Certainly the Douay-Rheims version was far better than the NAB which is currently being used by the Church.


13 posted on 01/23/2012 4:06:40 PM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

“Certainly the Douay-Rheims version was far better than the NAB which is currently being used by the Church.”

Why do you say the DR is better than the NAB?


14 posted on 01/23/2012 4:14:22 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

My translation says: “Nobody has seen God. The only-begotten God who is close to the Father’s heart has told us about Him.”

Or this from NIV. No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

IPad Bible apps are nice.


15 posted on 01/23/2012 4:17:20 PM PST by PjhCPA (They all suck. Rick sucks the least.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willgamer

Thanks!


16 posted on 01/23/2012 4:20:21 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Slump Tester
If you can read Shakespeare without catching the constant double entendra jokes, then you likely don't understand the KJB. Word meaning has changed considerably over 350 yrs
17 posted on 01/23/2012 4:27:19 PM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The NAB, “the only Son, God...” has attempted to perform some redefinition of the term “begotten” in order to justify it’s translation.

I guess the translators just couldn’t leave the DR.


18 posted on 01/23/2012 4:51:39 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PjhCPA
I think the NIV is taking liberties with the text there. Explaining what they think the verse means is one thing but pretending it's translation instead is quite different.
19 posted on 01/23/2012 4:57:36 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
I find the free downloadable software from www.e-sword.net to be extremely useful for cross-bible study and reference. It also has a lot of free bible reference books and dictionaries.
20 posted on 01/23/2012 4:57:55 PM PST by Col Freeper (FR is a smorgasbord of Conservative thoughts and ideas - dig in and enjoy it to its fullest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson