Bible Study

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by thecross2, Jan 6, 2010.

  1. thecross2

    thecross2
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does anyone know of a good Bible Study that covers Bible translations? My goal is to have a one night or short series of Sunday nights covering the subject briefly.

    We have some in the confregation that use various versions, but most are KJV (with some KJV Only). I would like to educate them and shed some light on a difficult subject.

    I have read a couple of good books and have a couple more yet to read. Of course, I'm swimming in information and have had a difficult time wrapping my mind around how to narrow it down.

    Does anyone know of a Bible Study or guide in this task?
     
  2. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    Good luck!! Don't go in with the idea of changing anybody's mind. Just present the truth and let God do the changing if any is to be done. In the past I have developed my own material using various sources to teach on this subject.
     
  3. thecross2

    thecross2
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    My secondary goal, beyond education, is that I can start using my ESV. I know right now, most wouldn't accept it very well. All they've ever known is KJV and have been indoctrinated into it. I don't want to change their opinion of the KJV as much as open their eyes to the truth.

    I like the KJV and use the KJV. And I came from a KJV only background. But when I began studying for myself, it became clear that onlyism is almost cultic. It's been a real eye opener for me and I'd like to for everyone to experience that. But I'm not sure if I'd do a good job articulating the facts and info.
     
  4. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    I assume you will attempt to explain why multiple English translations exist, not just the differences between them.

    I do not know of a specific study material package on the subject. Probably, if there was one, it could not be presented adequately in one night. If you find any such guide, please let me know!

    I think the explanation of translations is based on an understanding of ancient history, manuscript evidence & textual criticism, and translational methodology.

    The closest thing I know of (for short presentation) is The Forbidden Book a video history of the early English Bible (New Liberty Videos, 58 minutes).

    Also you could summarize some shorter books like Neil Lightfoot's How We Got the Bible (2nd edition is only 164 pages); or F.F.Bruce's History of the Bible in English (269 pages) which explicitly covers several translations. There are several other books that cover the topic of how to choose a translation.
     
  5. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wait a minute, your secondary goal is to use something you don't have the faculties already to show why you wish to do this? And what is your primary goal, if I might ask?
    Then leave it alone if you truly think that anyone who holds to the KJV as being "almost cultic". This frame of mind did not originate from the Scripture but did come from a source of instigation.

    Too many throw around the term "cult" without proper application and it is usually in a dreogative manner to subject others to one's own thinking.

    Do you wish to subjugate your listeners or educate them? Seems you're trying to ake on a very complicated task while there remains the simplicity in Christ just as the Bible tells us we are to seek and maintain.

    Since you said this has been "a real eye opener", why is it you need anymore than what you've seen with these newly opened eyes to present?

    I'm not provoking you, just asking.
     
  6. David Michael Harris

    David Michael Harris
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    1
    I suppose you could try to explain that the NT was written in Koine Greek and then explain that it was the common language of the day for a vast majority of the people at that time and then also that not everyone speaks English as they did in 1611 or whatever.

    The words of a Bible scholar come to mind...

     
  7. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,196
    Likes Received:
    374
    I'd also definitely include going over the KJV's "Translators to the Reader" notes as part of it. SO many who are KJVO don't read that part and don't understand the truth behind the KJV translators and their view of Scripture.

    I think it's definitely going to have to be a study you do on your own. I'd love to see what you work up though!
     
  8. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    I highly recommend noting the humility of the translators as a beacon for knowing the intent of their words in the letter to the reader.

    Noted are the spatial extent and scalar changes in the verb usage to determine exactly what one means. This is a preventative measure to thwart the subjugation of people's words.:type:
     
  9. David Michael Harris

    David Michael Harris
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Actually, I added the words 'the Gospel' where I did and probably did injustice to the scholars words, he meant the whole of the Bible and God's dealing with mankind.

    Sorry.

    Then again though, there is no greater message than the Gospel.
     
  10. David Michael Harris

    David Michael Harris
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sure they did not speak like that in 1611

    No problem with versions that are clear.

    My first Bible was KJV. Goodness knows how much it had improved.
     
    #10 David Michael Harris, Jan 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2010
  11. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, well, except to the point of the mesage of the glory of God, but that then the Gospel is the hinge to this.
     
  12. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't mean to bleed over from another topic but the following should be considered in response to what you said
    I don't find the essence of the above quote in other versions, although some come close.:type:
     
  13. David Michael Harris

    David Michael Harris
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    1
    I agree, it is a great Bible. But there is alway room for improvement.
     
  14. thecross2

    thecross2
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been studying it for a while. Problem is, I have a very short memory. I often forget the beginning of a book, before I get to the end.

    I thought I would begin the Study with some common misconceptions about the Bible. For starters, the KJV is not the Bible, in the sense that it was the original inspired Word of God. I've heard people say, "If the KJV was good enough for Paul, it's good enough for me."

    Other misconceptions: Whether or not they actually own a 1611 (they probably don't even own an original 1769), KJV was not translated from the Textus Receptus (as it was not completed until 1633), the KJV was not the 1st English Translation (Wycliffe's hand written version in 1382 and then Tyndale's 1st printed version in 1585, then the Great Bible in 1539 and then the Geneva in 1557... all of which supersede the KJV).

    So why is the KJV considered God's Word and no other version? The main argument against modern translations is that they changed the Word of God. But this is only true if you view the KJV as the inspired Word.

    When modern translations don't contain a word or verse that the KJV contains, they are viewed as having removed Scripture. Which is a misconception. In most cases, it is more likely that the KJV added to the Scripture, than the Modern translations took away.

    But some view that such a point defies the infallibility of God's Word. Again it's circular reasoning. That's only true if you view the KJV as God's inspired Word.

    I do believe in the infallible inherent Word of God. But I believe it was inspired and inherent when it left the hand of Paul and that original document was inspired and preserved by God. We have sense translated it into many different languages by God's divine providence.

    But what documents in today's world constitute God's inspired Word? Is it the KJV Bible and none other? If so, by who's authority do we make this interjection?

    Is it not more likely that God's Word has been preserved thru the overwhelming agreement of an amazing amount of manuscripts and various translations...? And if you look at all the material as a whole and compare them with each other, you can clearly see distinct picture of God's Holy Word.

    That seems to be the viewpoint of modern translations, which derive from modern scholars and theologians from all denominations (conservative as well as liberal). And to be honest, that was the viewpoint of the translators of the KJV as well.

    It amazes me, how throughout history, every time someone does something amazing for God, there are always naysayers. Some who will even go so far as to both verbally and physically assault men and women of God for doing His work. There will be those that mock and scorn and ridicule God's work. And amazingly enough, they usually come from within God's Own House! I do recall how they treated a Man named Jesus. And who it was that verbally and physically assaulted Him.

    They say hindsight is 20/20. We always see so clearly later on, what we can't see right before our very eyes. In 2010 Jesus Christ is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords. But in 33 A.D. He was labeled a heretic. Just as was Wycliffe, Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Wesley, and even the translators of modern Bibles and those who dare to read them.

    Just a few years ago, I was one of the ones persecuting these men. I was Saul of Tarsus. But then one day, I had a Damascus road experience (a real eye opener). I realized that I had been blindly following the doctrines of men, never once letting God speak for Himself. When I did, I found out that all men are liars and only God is true. By religious tradition, I had been calling unclean, what God was giving to clean us up. It's hard to admit when you're wrong. It's even harder to do something about it. And so for starters, I will no longer be one of the naysayers. But even more so, I want to repair some of the damage I have done.

    So I wish to educate people on the fallacies of KJV Onlyism. To help free them from man-made shackles and open up a whole new way of understanding God's Word. I don't think all translations are equal. There are certainly differences that should be noted. I for one, prefer a more literal word for word translation (where possible) as opposed to a strictly dynamic equivalence. Books like the GNB or NLT or NIV (not nearly as dynamic) make for a good read, but I wouldn't quote from them as Scripture, because there is the potential for private interpretation in the dynamic translation style. However they may all be used as resource material.

    Obviously, you see how it's easy to get carried away with this topic. I have a difficult time being brief. I feel like I just typed a short essay :type: and I haven't begun to scratch the surface...
     
  15. thecross2

    thecross2
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    I actually believe that all the many manuscripts and all the many translations in all the many different languages, prove definatively God's ability to preserve His Holy Word!

    How else could it be passed down from generation to generation, from nation to nation, from language to language... and yet not change the Holy Message?
     
  16. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,196
    Likes Received:
    374
    Just a small correction - it's "inerrant" instead of "inherent". :)

    The rest of it? Good stuff.
     
  17. thecross2

    thecross2
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good catch. I was hurrying trying to get ready for church. Thanks.
     
  18. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    [snipped - attack on the Word of God]
     
    #18 Harold Garvey, Jan 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 7, 2010
  19. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    It is true that there are many misconceptions about the KJV (such as you mention that it was clearly NOT the first 'Bible' in English). But I would have to disagree with your assertion that "the KJV was not translated from the Textus Receptus" on the basis that it wasn't until the 1633 edition that the 'received text' term was employed. The NT of the KJV is indeed a translation from an underlying TR Greek text (the majority of differences between TR editions are mostly insignificant).

    One way to ease into a discussion of translations is to just attempt to define the term 'Bible' (speaking of misconceptions) because the word 'Bible' clearly identifies different canons to different groups: Jews, Protestants, Samaritans, Catholics, Ethiopians, Eastern Orthodox, etc.
     
    #19 franklinmonroe, Jan 6, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 6, 2010
  20. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi there "TheCross." In general I agree with the point you are trying to make in the above post, but you do repeat a few errors which I have pointed out below to help make you presentation more accurate.

    The Textus Receptus was first published in 1516 with editions also published in 1519, 1522, 1527, 1535, 1546, 1549, 1550, 1551, 1565, 1582, 1588, 1598, 1604, 1624, 1633 et cetera. The edition of 1633 was the first to call the work the "Textus Receptus," but was not the first Textus Receptus.

    One of the primary editions used in the translation if the AV (KJV) was the 1598 edition by Theodore Beza.

    The first full printed edition of Tyndale's New Testament was in 1526.

    While the Geneva New Testament was first published in 1557, the first edition of the full Geneva Bible was in 1560.

    This is the punch-line of an old joke.

    I'd love to own a 1611 edition, but they are quite rare and will set you back well over $75,000. At any rate this really isn't an issue. The text of the AV has been updated several times to correct errors and update spelling. Any modern AV edition published by Oxford of Cambridge will give the reader a very accurate text that conforms very well to the intent of the translators.

    There is a lot of debate about this issue and I would suggest that you give it a LOT more study before you present this to the people in your church as fact. They trust you and really should have a firm grasp of the issues around EACH disputed passage BEFORE you get up and tell them this.
     

Share This Page

Loading...