From The Mind Of God To The Mind Of Man

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Rippon, Mar 22, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,376
    Likes Received:
    323
    This book was released in 1999 by Ambassador-Emerald International . The authors were biblically conservative -- Fundamentalists .

    Today I will quote from the intro by James B. Williams . He has some interesting remarks on page 4 .

    Many who are strong advocates of the KJV Only position believe that they are heroically defending the Faith , when , in reality , they are defending false assunptions . It is also unfortunate that the focus of these disseminators of misinformation has developed into attacks upon the faith , character , and integrity of those who do not share their viewpoint .

    [ He defends Westcott and Hort , the textual editors behind the RV ] I have three of Westcott's commentaries in my library , and I challenge anyone to find one sentence that would be a departure from Fundamentalist doctrine .
     
  2. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,376
    Likes Received:
    323
    Chapter 2 -- Canonization and Apocrypha , by Paul Downey .

    He mentions the Synod at Jamnia ( ca.AD 90 ) ." One of the major topics of discussion of the Jewish elders who gathered for the Synod was a review of the canon of their holy books ... of the Old Testament . The leaders who met there understood that they were not ' creating ' a canon ; they were acknowledging that the collection traditionally revered as divinely inspired deserved its status as Holy Scripture ."( 37 )

    " The earliest church council to list a New Testament canon was the council at Laodicea ( AD 363 )... these councils did not create the canon , but recognized and ratified that which was in common use . " ( 56 )

    "On at least two occasions Paul quoted Greek poets: 1 Corinthians 15:33 contains a line from Thais , a play by Greek comic poet Menander ; and Titus 1:12 contains a line about the cretans attributed to Epimenides . " ( 42 )

    " The Geneva Bible ( 1599 edition ) became the first English Bible printed without the Apocrypha ... An edition of the Geneva Bible printed in Amsterdam in 1640 finally revised the page numbers and the table of contents and added a statement between the Testaments defending the omission of the Apocrypha ... the Puritans and Separists refused to use the KJV , bringing to America their beloved Geneva Bibles instead ... the publication of an edition without the Apocrypha ( 1629 ) ... it was not until 1827 ... that the KJv began to be published without the Apocrypha as a matter of course . " (45,46 )

    " The most detailed statement on the Reformed church's approach to Scripture comes from the Westminster Confession ( 1643 ) . No other statement of any group was so thorough in its definition of Scripture as was this document ...none gave the careful definition and description the Westminster Confession had provided . " ( 60,61 )
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,376
    Likes Received:
    323
    Dr. Mark Minnick's chapter is next . ( BTW , I have listened to scads and skads of his messages -- and even heard him in-person a couple of times ) . His chapter is called " Let's Meet The Manuscripts " . I'm sorry that I will not be quoting any of his own words here . In the future , in another book selection -- I'll quote him .


    He quotes Robert L. Dabney re the Textus Receptus : " No one claims for the Textus Receptus , or common Greek text of the New Testament , any sacred right , as though it represented the ipsissima verba , written by the inspired men in every case ... It is therefore not asserted to be above emendation ... The received text should still be retained by all , not as a standard of absolute accuracy , but as a common standard of reference . " ( pages 91,93 )
     
  4. 4His_glory

    4His_glory
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is great well balanced book, though the KJVO's don't think so. I recommend the sequeal: "God's Word in Our Hands". Hantz Bernard wrote a chapter on translating that is excellent, and Dr. Minick also has a chapter showing the textuat variances of various texts and translations.
     
  5. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    This book, "From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man" is misformed.

    Dr. James B. Williams wrote:

    Westcott wrote:
    These quotations contradicted each other. The Bible warned:

    John 5:44-47 KJV

    Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

    For had ye believed Moses , ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

    But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

    I do not see how these men went to be with the Lord.

    [ March 25, 2006, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: Askjo ]
     
  6. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Minnick wrote:
    This is his misformed comment. His statement, "God uses unorthodox men" contradicts with the holy men whom God used (2 Peter 1:21).
     
  7. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    78
    God used "holy men" to write the scriptures. God never talks about the kind of men who will translate them.
     
  8. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    How dare you to say "unorthodox" men to be "HOLY" men?

    John 17:8

    For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me

    God gave His words to His BELIEVERS only, not unbelievers. They had God's Words for preaching the Gospels and made many copies for providing God's Words to people. Therefore they protected God's Words through many centuries. Most unbelievers messed up with God's CERTAIN Words in the past and so is today.
     
  9. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,805
    Likes Received:
    78
    Where did I say unorthodox men were holy? I must have missed that one.

    God never told us in Scripture that He would use holy men to do the translations.

    I won't take this thread off topic, but I am not so sure that all of the KJV translators were "holy men."
     
  10. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Askjo said:

    This book, "From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man" is misformed.

    Why? Did someone leave it out in the rain?

    [​IMG]

    (Askjo accusing someone of misinformation is something akin to Stalin naming Communists before the HUAC . . .)
     
  11. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Westcott wrote:
    These quotations contradicted each other.
    </font>[/QUOTE]I do not hold to the opinion that a qualification to be saved and to go to heaven is to believe in a grossly ignorant and feeble interpretation of the first three chapters in the Book of Genesis. [snipped]

    Matt. 7:1. "Do not judge so that you will not be judged.
    2. "For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.
    3. "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?
    4. "Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye?
    5. "You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (NASB, 1995)

    [​IMG]

    [ March 26, 2006, 03:21 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
  12. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you missed the point. These unbelieving men's writings are their outward acts. For example, when a teacher can judge at student's homework paper, will you forbid this teacher to give a grade to that student?

    When an atheist wrote, "I do not believe in God," will you say that he went to be with the Lord?

    When you judge your children, for example, will you never rebuke them for their lies?
     
  13. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    I think you missed the point. These unbelieving men's writings are their outward acts. For example, when a teacher can judge at student's homework paper, will you forbid this teacher to give a grade to that student?
    </font>[/QUOTE]I may have missed your point for I do not know you personally, but from my point of view, there is more than a little bit of difference between a teacher grading the paper of a student, and a “Christian” condemning to hell in his heart great men of the Christian faith who devoted their very lives to the furtherance of the understanding of the Bible. And I believe the word’s of Christ recorded in Matthew 7 in which he wrote that those “Christians” who disobey His word and condemn, in their hearts, men of God to the fires of hell shall reap that very same standard of measure and thus be condemned by the Lord Himself to the fires of hell for eternity. I do not know you personally, and I am not speaking of you personally, but EXCLUSIVELY of those to whom the word of God in Matthew 7:1-5 applies.

    It is not up to me to condemn him in my heart; it is up to God to condemn him if that is what God chooses to do. And I know for an incontrovertible fact that if should act in such an exceedingly evil manner as to condemn anyone in my heart, I should myself have every expectation of spending eternity in the fires of hell.

    I love my children more than life itself and I shall NEVER do such an exceedingly evil thing as to condemn them, in my heart, to the fires of hell. The Lord himself has blessed me with the stewardship over my own children, and that stewardship demands that I discipline them in accord with the will of God as recorded in the Bible, but the Lord God did not bless any man or any woman with stewardship over Westcott and Hort as grown men and all those who touch them shall be touched by God accordingly as declared by the Lord Himself in Matthew’s gospel.

    Those persons who are responsible for the creation of the most evil and pernicious imaginable websites that vilify great men of God shall be judged by God, as shall every man, according to his deeds, and I am more than confident that their reward will be just.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    n speaking of lies, there's a gt thread here featuring Brian Tegart of the Westcott-Hort Resource Centre exposing the lies of King James Onlyists against WH:

    http://www.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?p=34089&highlight=tegart#post34089

    so far his evidence has gone unanswered.
     
  15. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,376
    Likes Received:
    323
    The next chapter I'll feature is by John K. Hutcheson Sr. It's called English Translations Before The King James Version .

    The Geneva Bible continued to be printed for over thirty years after the publication of the King James , with over sixty editions appearing after 1611 . ( 121 )

    He speaks of the Rheims-Douay Bible on page 122 .

    Yet the use of the Rhemish version also reintroduced many Latinisms into the text of the KJV that had been edited from English translations by means of the various Protestant versions .

    In his conclusion :

    The translators saw the need to keep up with the changing English language and to keep the English version of God's Word clear and fresh in order to understand His divine revelation . They believed that each new translation was the preserved Word of God , though it differed from previous versions in some minor readings . None of these men were bound by tradition to retain archaic words from former versions . If an unlearned plowboy were to be able to read the Scriptures , it had to be in vocabulary that he could understand .
    Seven of the versions were published within a sixty year period in the sixteenth century , providing a setting in which multiple translations existed . None of the translators believed that his work was the last word in the ongoing effort to keep the Word of God in a format that anyone , regardless of educational level , could read . Nor did these godly men see any problem with changing from a previous version to a more accurate translation after several years or a few decades .

    [ closing sentence ] we need to be challenged by their commitment to making sure that each generation had a fresh English translaton of the Bible so that they could hear God speak to them .( 123 )
     
  16. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Westcott wrote:
    These quotations contradicted each other. The Bible warned:

    John 5:44-47 KJV

    Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

    For had ye believed Moses , ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.

    But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

    I do not see how these men went to be with the Lord.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Be fair enough to judge those men by the same standard you would apply to the KJV translators or KJVO's. Would you like to discuss ways the very same type of reasoning would have precluded the KJV translators from being in heaven?

    W&H lived in a time when orthodox Christianity was struggling with the concepts and responses to evolution, naturalism, and a pervasive view of God that rationalized separating Him from creation so as to separate Him from natural evil. People like Scofield also reflect this struggle to come up with an answer.

    The questions weren't even primarily scientific. Forced readings of Genesis weren't based on blind acceptance of evolution but rather on the philosophical/metaphysical presuppositions that underpin it.
     
  17. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,376
    Likes Received:
    323
    The 6th chapter is by John C.Mincy . It is called The Making Of The King James Version .

    On page 136 he gives some interesting quotes from John Bois who was the only one we know of who kept notes on some of the translation process of the JJV . Gustavos S.Paine comments ' Bois's notes run from Romans through the Apocalypse , and for the debatable passages present a number of alternative readings .'

    Archbishop Bancroft and King James viewed the KJV primarily as a tool to help centralize the power of the King and bishops in England and to unify the Anglican Church . ( 137 )

    Dr. Miles Smith , it is generally agreed , is the author of the preface entitled " The Translators to the Reader . " Interestingly , he quotes all of his Scripture references in the preface fro the Geneva , the very Bible that the King hated .( 138 )

    The KJV caught on slowly , and many of the translators themselves for years to come quoted out of the former versions , and the Geneva Bible continued to be the Bible of the common people until 1660 . [ He quotes Ralph Earle : The pilgrims who came to this country in 1620 refused to have anything to do with the King James Version ]. ( 139 )

    Erasmus introduced some well-known words into his Greek text that are in no known Greek manuscript , yet the translations of these words are still in the KJV to this hour . Among other matters in the KJV that need attention is the often-ignored truth that the KJV translators were not averse to using paraphrase to express the text . An example of paraphrase is seen in the KJV's use of the phrase " God forbid " throughout Paul's epistles ... And while ' God forbid ' is surely a strong negative statement , it is hardly an accurate translation of the Greek phrase that Paul uses with such frequency .
     
  18. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    He wrote:
    Wrong! Beza had his OWN text, not text of Erasmus.
     
  19. Scott J

    Scott J
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2001
    Messages:
    8,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    Beza revised Erasmus' text. It was not a wholly new effort.
     
  20. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    11,356
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Askjo, let me give you some friendly advice. When you don't know what you are talking about, the best thing you can do is stop talking!

    Anybody who knows anything at all about the history of the TR knows that Beza based his TR on the 1551 edition of Stephanus, which was a revision of the 1546 edition of Stephanus, which was based on the 1522 edition of Erasmus.

    In fact, the only difference was that Beza's 3rd edition of 1582 included input from Codex Claromontanus, a 6th century primarily Western Text manuscript.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...