Splitting Hairs?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Thermodynamics, Feb 4, 2009.

  1. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have to admit that I have always been interested in early Biblical manuscripts and the history of how we got our Bible. For that reason I was drawn to this part of the forum as soon as I joined.

    I think that there is a valid case to be made that some manuscripts and some English translations are better than others and I am interested in exploring the differences that do exist.

    I tend to approach issues like this in a clinical sort of way and I am suprised when people get emotional about them, a failing of mine I suppose.

    I do have to say that I am somewhat suprised by just how personal people on both of this debate take the issue. I knew that there were radicals on the KJVO side, those who believe the original Greek and Hebrew should be corrected by the English of the Authorized Version for example. What I did not expect to find was positions just as radical on the other side. As an example of this I cite those who believe that manuscript A. can have thousands of differences from manuscript B. and that both are equal in their faithfullness to the originals.

    While I find the topic of manuscripts and Bible versions interesting, I can't help but believe that in the grand scheme of things we are splitting hairs. There are more important things to get worked-up about like actually reading one of the Bibles we are fighting over or sharing one with a lost person.

    Just my two cents worth.
     
  2. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe you haven't noticed this is a debate forum? [​IMG]

    As for a ms having thousands of more differences than another ms and both being faithful - those differences can be very minor, like the spelling of names and places. None of it affects doctrine.

    If you don't want to split hairs, this forum is probably not for you, although I don't think all threads here are like that.
     
  3. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Marcia, I guess the point of this thread (or one of them) is how emotional people can become about their Bible version or some other minor topic and logic and reason fly out the window. Those people are thus rendered unable to carry on a reasonable conversation, I just find that interesting.
     
  4. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some people are great at giving some people posting directions whilst they bust in on other threads without thought for the thread theme....

    Some just fight for fight's sake.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  5. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, yes, people can get emotional all over the BB! I don't find it interesting though; I find it exasperating, even when I'm getting emotional! :laugh:
     
  6. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    I for one do not believe that all mss are copied equally.

    That is why textual criticism is important.

    That said, two different manuscripts could in face have differences and yet be more or less equal in their faithfulness to the original.

    One could simply have mistakes in a different place than the other but the sum of mistakes could be similar.
     
  7. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    As aforementioned, the whole process of textual criticism is a great field to study. Have you read any good books on the modern use of textual criticism? Just curious. :)

    It is the Bible afterall. Some people tend to get worked up about. Notice what happens when you ask about inerrancy...;)

    Oh I think textual criticism is deeply important. Is it on the same level of spiritual importance as leading people to Christ? No, but it sure helps to know that we have a terrifically reliable, reconstructed text to use when doing so. :thumbs:

    In our age that is so defined by the quest for "scientific" certainty (as if we can acheive it) there is something important about using proper methods to formulate a text from archeological evidences. The atheists and doubters questioned the Bible and asked for evidences...the theological community has responded with vigor. I think that is rather important too. :saint:
     
  8. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Seeing as how none of us were there when these ancient mss were made, how can any of us say with any authority how accurate or inaccurate any of them are? I simply TRUST GOD to have presented His word to us in the forms HE has chosen. And nowhere in His word does He limit Himself to just one version that didn't exist at that time.
     
  9. RustySword

    RustySword
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Textual criticism is very interesting, and is indeed a science. Most editions of Greek and Hebrew Testaments have a "textual apparatus" at the bottom of each page listing variants from the main text (the main text will be whatever the editors thought was the preferred reading).

    The task of the exegete is to weigh the external evidence (i.e., the manuscript support for a particular reading) with the internal evidence (i.e., which reading best fits into the context of the passage, compares with parallel passages where there may be no manuscript disputes, etc.).

    One thing that I have always liked about the NKJV editions published by Nelson is that most editions list the variants of the Critical Text and the Majority Text from the Textus Receptus. Although this is greatly simplified from having a textual apparatus, it at least gives the reader an idea of some of the more common variant readings.
     
  10. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello Thermodynamics

    I don’t think I have spoken to you before.

    You said.......
    Not really.

    You went on to mention, how winning the lost, is more important.
    (But how can you win the lost, when your in doubt about God’s Word:)

    Jesus said.........
    “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” John 5:24

    You will notice here, that one must be exposed to “God’s Word”, to get saved.

    [attack on Bible snipped]
     
    #10 stilllearning, Feb 6, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 6, 2009
  11. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yet you doubt God's word is God's word in any translation except one of the KJVs. How can you win the lost when you're in doubt about God's word?

    True - one must be exposed to God's word in order to be saved. But there's no scripture anywhere in any translation that says someone must be exposed to one particular Bible translation in order to be saved. The notion that there's only one legitimate word of God in English is man-made and anti-scriptural.

    The NKJV, the NASB, the NIV, the ESV and a host of other modern translations are God's word just as much as the KJVs. BTW, stilllearning, which KJV is the perfect one? Is it the original 1611? Or is it one of the Cambridge KJVs? Or maybe one of the Oxford KJVs? They're all different. If it's possible to have only one English translation that's the perfect and inerrant word of God, then which KJVs do you disqualify as being the word of God?

    If you accept the differences in the KJVs and claim they're all equally the word of God, then why don't you accept the differences in the modern translations? Why do you deny modern translations are the word of God?
     
  12. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Stillllearning, love that user name, I think it is great to never close one's mind to new facts and ideas. I intend to die a student.

    I notice that what Jesus says there is "heareth" His Word, not "readeth." I prefer the Authorized Version because I believe it is a solid translation based on superior manuscripts, but I have no doubt that you could also take one of the modern versions and lead a person to the lord with it. In fact I believe God is so full of saving grace that you could lead a person to the Lord just by saying a few verses to them from memory without that person ever seeing a Bible.

    "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God...."
     
  13. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    The differences between the various "editions" of the Authorized Version are very minor to say the least. In a nutshell all that was done with the so-called revisions was to correct typographical errors in previous editions and bring spelling and up to date and to standardize said spelling. This is why there are minor differences between the way words are spelled between the Oxford and Cambridge texts and a few others. There is no place that I am aware of where and meaning has been changed.
     
  14. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    AMEN! A very common error when coming across the phrase "word of God" (or even the term "word") in Scripture is to automatically assume that it is referring to the 'Bible' (written revelation).
     
  15. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Splitting Hares?

    According to the code of making sacrifices (read the first five books of the Old Testament): certain larger clean animals (ox, sheep, goat) is to be split into two parts for proper burnt offering. Smaller animals (dove) are burn whole.

    The hare (rabbit) is an unclean animal. To split a hare is to make gross errors on the importance of things:

    1. you are not supposed to sacrifice unclean animals
    2. you are not supposed to make a small animal into a large animal

    But hey, nobody believes my trailer around here, eh?
     
  16. John Toppass

    John Toppass
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,059
    Likes Received:
    7
    Jesus also said John 5:24 (NKJV) "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. "

    Also, John 5:24 Greek New testament (Wescott-Hort)
    " αμην αμην λεγω υμιν οτι ο τον λογον μου ακουων και πιστευων τω πεμψαντι με εχει ζωην αιωνιον και εις κρισιν ουκ ερχεται αλλα μεταβεβηκεν εκ του θανατου εις την ζωην"


    I believe all these versions and more! God is good :thumbs:
     
  17. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed you are a cheeky fellow.:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: You are also an outstanding student of God's Holy Word.
     
  18. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello Keith M

    You reminded me of the value of the NKJV, the NASB, the NIV, the ESV;

    And I started to correct you, and ask you to read my response again more closely:

    But then I saw, that the part of my response, where I said that, had been edited out.
    --------------------------------------------------
    I agree, that the KJV, isn’t the only Bible, that can bring people to Christ.
     
  19. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi Thermodynamics

    You asked a question, that has been asked several times before, all over the net......
    The perfect Word of God, are those accurate copies of the original, that the KJV was translated from.

    But I go ahead and extend that “perfection” over to the KJV, because of God’s promise to me(as a believer), that He was going to preserve His Word for me.
    --------------------------------------------------
    So, the answer to your question, would be the 1611;

    Although I am glad to have an edition, with the spelling errors, having been mostly corrected.
     
  20. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78

    I appreciate a clear answer. You are the first one to admit that the words 'of God' should have been left out of 1 John 5v12.

    1611 - Hee that hath the Sonne, hath life; and hee that hath not the Sonne, hath not life.

    All later editions - He that hath the Son hath life: and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
     

Share This Page

Loading...