Common ground(s) - but not coffee

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by EdSutton, Oct 3, 2008.

  1. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    This question, if not the title, is appropriate to this forum.

    What do the following individuals all have in common, with the late Dr. Arthur L. Farstad?

    Dr. John Rainolds, Dr. Phillip Schaff, Dr. John Wycliffe, and Dr. Edwin H. Palmer?

    Any ideas??

    If no one gets it, I will give the answer later.

    Ed
     
    #1 EdSutton, Oct 3, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 3, 2008
  2. Salamander

    Salamander
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    They all were doctors?
     
  3. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Give this man a first prize, [​IMG]

    for this is entirely true, but still not what I am looking for in the purview of this particular forum.

    So I don't have to hand out another [​IMG]unnecessarily, they are also all deceased, but that is still, not it either.

    I still have another [​IMG] to give out. :thumbs:

    Any other guesses, anyone?

    Ed
     
    #3 EdSutton, Oct 3, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 3, 2008
  4. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    They all believed the Bible should be in the language (vernacular) of the common man? They all used the TR as a basis for their translations?
     
  5. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Close, but not exactly to the first question, for Dr. Arthur Farstad, at least, already believed the Bible was in the vernacular of the common man, although this isn't what I was looking for, and

    No to the second, for not all used the TR for the NT. But two very good guesses. I'll post the answer in a day or so, if no one gets it, before then.

    Ed
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    They all declared belief that the Scriptures in their entirety are the uniquely inspired Word of God, free from error in their original autographs.

    They wanted updating of language in translations and worked toward that end.

    Just guessing!

    (I know Farstad's position since he was NT editor of the NKJV that I use.)
     
  7. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    I had to google it but all of them were chairmen of translation committees, I guess including Wycliffe who had a committee of 1. :) Dr. Bob's was right.

    Edit: I always thought Wycliffe worked alone on the Wyclif bible but I just read something to suggest otherwise. Learn something new everyday.

    Dr. Arthur L. Farstad - NKJV
    Dr. John Rainolds - KJV - chair of the First Oxford Company that translated from Isaiah to Malachi
    Dr. Phillip Schaff - ASV
    Dr. John Wycliffe - Wyclif bible
    Dr. Edwin H. Palmer - NIV

    While Rainolds was not the chair of the overall KJV committe, he was the first to initiate the need for the KJV, so that is probably another common thread between all of them -- initiating a new translation.
     
    #7 Gold Dragon, Oct 4, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 4, 2008
  8. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Much here said is true but not the unique factor I am looking for.

    Gold Dragon is getting quite warm, but simultaneously is still cold, at the same time, as to this unique common thread. (Am I confused? Well, yes and no, I guess, but not here, with this answer.) ;)

    Incidentally, I almost slipped up, and said Gold Dragon "had almost nailed it", but that would be incorrect. However, he is the closest thus far, and that based on more than one thing he or she said. There is a good possibility that I may have misspoken concerning Dr. Edwin H. Palmer, in one aspect. BTW, that statement is another hint. :D

    Anyone else want to hazard a guess? Or some that have already done so want to add a bit more?

    Ed
     
    #8 EdSutton, Oct 4, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 4, 2008
  9. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG]

    Still not too late to get another guess or three in, on this one, folks. Got a few more hours. :thumbs:

    Ed
     
  10. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ed - there may be a hundred "common ground" areas among these men. Way too vague.

    What part of shared belief/practice were YOU thinking?
     
  11. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    And the answer is:

    As promised:

    "May I have the envelope, please?"


    The question was -
    The answer has more than one sub-part, with the unique factors, in addition to some of the points others correctly brought up. Let me thank all of you for the contributions, you have made, here.

    A.) All were Doctors. (Salamander) True. In fact, Dr. Schaff had more than one doctorate.

    B.) They all believed the Bible should be in the language (vernacular) of the common man. (Amy.G) Partially true, although all except Dr. Wycliffe, already initially had this available, for reasons that will become clearer, in a moment.

    C.) Amy.G, Dr. Bob, and Gold Dragon have all alluded to the fact that they all worked on Bible translations. (True)

    D.) They all used the TR as a basis for their translations. (Amy.G) Mostly not true, actually. Even given that I know what Amy.G means, and referring only to the NT, vs. a technical explanation of this. It is partially true, in that the text form, that would later come to be known as the TR was the primary NT text for Dr. John Rainolds at one time. The TR text was also the primary NT text for Dr. Arthur Farstad, at one time.

    E.) They all declared belief that the Scriptures in their entirety are the uniquely inspired Word of God, free from error in their original autographs. (Dr. Bob) I definitely suspect this to be entirely true, although I have not read this specifically, about all. It does seem to make complete sense.

    F.) They wanted updating of language in translations and worked toward that end. (Dr. Bob) True.

    G.) (I know Farstad's position since he was NT editor of the NKJV that I use.) (Dr. Bob) (True, but I kindda' gotcha' on this one, at least a little bit.) ;) In fact, Dr. Farstad was the General or Executive Editor of all the NKJV, and not only the NT, and also served on all the committees, both of the OT and NT. It was mostly "his baby" so to speak.

    H.) ...all of them were chairmen of translation committees, (Gold Dragon) True, although I kinda' doubt there was much formal organization of the 'committee' 'headed' by Dr. Wycliffe.

    I.) Dr. Arthur L. Farstad - NKJV
    Dr. John Rainolds - KJV - chair of the First Oxford Company that translated from Isaiah to Malachi
    Dr. Phillip (sic) Schaff - ASV
    Dr. John Wycliffe - Wyclif bible
    Dr. Edwin H. Palmer - NIV (Gold Dragon) True.

    J.) While Rainolds was not the chair of the overall KJV committe, he was the first to initiate the need for the KJV, so that is probably another common thread between all of them -- initiating a new translation. (Gold Dragon) Mostly true, although I'm not sure Dr. Philip Schaff or Dr. Edwin H. Palmer can be properly said to have "initiated" the translations they are associated with.

    Part 2 to follow:

    Ed
     
    #11 EdSutton, Oct 6, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 6, 2008
  12. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    And the answer is: Part 2

    (Continuing)

    Here are the additions and/or explanations to the above:

    K. All five of them were the primary "guiding light" or "genesis" as it were, of a particular version (or versions) of Scripture, that we would probably consider to be somewhat of a "standard version" today, much as Gold Dragon has already noted, above. (For Dr. Farstad, however, that number actually amounts to 3, for in addition to the NKJV, as he was also Co-Editor, along with Zane Hodges, of the Greek New Testament, Majority Text, and also the HCSB.

    L.) All five of them worked on more than one version, translation, and/or primary editions of the English Bible.

    1. Dr. Wycliffe, - "The Morning Star of the Reformation"
    a.) He was not only the 'instigator' of the original Wycliffe Bible(s) ~ 1382, ff., (WYC) but also encouraged his assistant, John Purvey, in the revision known as the Wycliffe/Purvey, of ~ 1385-1395. (WYP) Since these were all hand-copied, it was a bit easier to "edit-on-the-fly", as well as also easier to make small errata while copying, hence it is my understanding that no two of these are exactly identical to every small detail.
    b.) The Wycliffe Bible editions were both translated from the Latin Vulgate, and not the TR or Massoretic texts.

    2.) Dr. Rainolds, - "Have Quill, Will Travel" was the real 'instigator' for the KJV, as he first proposed this to King James I, and did also serve as the Chair of the 1st Company at Oxford, as noted by Gold Dragon. And the NT of this version was indeed based on the future TR, via Tyndale, Rogers, et al..

    Less known, however, is the fact that Dr. Rainolds, although himself a Puritan, also participated in the revising of the text of the primary translating work of Dr. Gregory Martin in the Douay-Rheims NT of 1582 (D-R, Bible 1609-1610) which was also translated from the Vulgate into the vernacular, for English Catholics.

    3.) Dr. Schaff, was the 'guiding light' and the Chairman of the 'American Company' of Revisers. As such they were part of both the RV or ERV (NT-1881, OT-1885) and the ASV (1901). The NT text of this version is predominately from the W/H (1881) and Tregelles (1857) texts and not that of the TR.

    4.) Dr. Palmer was the Chairman for the NIV (NT-1973, Bible-1978; Major Rev. 1984) The primary NIV NT text is the UBS-3 text, and not the TR.

    5.) Dr. Farstad was the originator for the NKJV (NT-1979, Bible-1982) and served as the General Editor. The NT follows the TR. In addition, Dr. Farstad later conceived the HCSB, and started working on it. However, he agreed to join with the SS Board of the SBC, in their own project, incorporating his work with theirs, and He would become the overseer. Dr. Farstad intended to use the MT, which he had co-edited, as the textual basis for the NT. However, he suddenly died, a short while into the project, and the SS Board decided to use the UBS text, instead.

    M.) All five died while working on their second version or edition, and prior to its appearance.

    Hence the unusual commonalities are that which I have listed in bold, the headings of K, L, and M..

    N.) In summary, the dates of the English editions/versions they previously worked on; the dates of their deaths; and editions they championed, but never lived to see completed with the editions for which they were the primary mover or guiding lights underlined.

    1.) Dr. John Wycliffe (WYC ~1382; died 1384, WYP ~1385 ff.)
    2.) Dr. John Rainolds (D-R - 1582, 1609-10; died 1607; KJV -1611)
    3.) Dr. Philip Schaff (RV -1881, 1885; died 1893; ASV - 1901)
    4.) Dr. Edwin H. Palmer (NIV - 1973, 1978, died. 1980, NIV Revision- 1984)
    5.) Dr. Arthur L. Farstad (NKJV - 1979, 1982; died 1998; HCSB - 1999, 2002)

    I found this all interesting.

    Ed
     
    #12 EdSutton, Oct 6, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 6, 2008
  13. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    I enjoyed your topic, but --
    I have reason to believe that it was not John but rather his older brother William that worked on the D-R version. I know that some sources name John, but I believe that this is a corruption as a result of there being two Dr. Reinolds working in translation circles at about the same time. It seems that William was a committed Roman Catholic studying for the priesthood in Douai at the time of the D-R work.
     
  14. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    Thanks. It was interesting to do a little digging and finding out the stories behind these men and the translations they were involved in.

    So, what did I win for getting the closest? ;)
     
  15. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Glad you enjoyed it.

    As to what you won??

    The "kewpie doll" that webdog passed on a month ago, if I can find it, again.

    Here it is:

    [​IMG]

    ;)

    Ed
     
  16. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am aware of this, as well. And I would not attempt to be very dogmatic on this, in any way.

    William Reynolds was an active Catholic, and studied for and became a priest, as well as academic. He also was, as you noted, involved in the translating work of the D-R. However, it would certainly not be very farfetched, to think that the two brothers, both Oxford academics, themselves, would consult with each other, at least on matters of linguistics, and the wording of the text was what has been suggested, by some of the articles I looked at concerning this.

    Interestingly, apparently William Rainolds was possibly the main D-R NT man, and John Rainolds was the primary OT leader for the KJV. Neither lived to be a very aged individual, with William Rainolds dying at ~ 50 and John Rainolds dying at ~ 58. And both died before the complete translation they were involved with was complete, as the OT and Apocrypha of the D-R was completed in 1609-10, and only a year or so before the KJV of 1611.

    I also happend upon a statement that the "Study Notes" from the Geneva Bible, the dissatisfaction with which, were ostensibly a primary reason for the call for the Hampton Conference which led to the KJV of 1611, were still to be found included in some of the KJVs for another century.

    Multiple "Dueling Versions," maybe??

    Ed
     

Share This Page

Loading...