Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Nazaroo, Aug 9, 2011.
I'm quoting this recent post by Mr. Scrivener from TC-Alternate List:
Goodness me what a tirade, and here I was thinking how HARD it is to find a Catholic Bible in essentially "Catholic" supply shops, and,( be still my beating heart the horror I felt) when at a Catholic church there was a large and very prominently placed expurgated Bible.:type:
Reading other post by Nazaroo, I believe he is in the KJ Only crowd. He put forth a decent argument for the Byzantine Text over other MSS for the New Testament. Though I did have questions for him on that related topic (statistic argument for the Textus Receptus) I felt that some one so committed to his view I would just get fanatical answers inspired by Peter Ruckman. Which wouldn't be helpful in a productive debate.
The thing that kills me with this quote is the author's full belief in conspiracy theories. I'm supprised the Illuminati weren't brought up. And he terrified me to look under my bed for Jesuit boogymen. Otherwise there are some points mentioned which should be considered.
Sorry, I'm not KJVOnly.
I don't like any English translations,
although the KJV is probably the most honest overall.
Also, I'm a scientist, not a textual critic.
I prefer evidence, logic, and rules of probability.
Not hysteria, half-wit reasoning and homos.
Scrivener is a thorough skeptic, not a conspiracy theorist.
He's far more jaded than I am, but he's very sober.
And often witty. His final line was priceless:
What makes it so funny is its true.
The Mass is mostly a bunch of bible verses strung together with very little commentary.
I have been using a Jerusalem (Catholic) Bible for 20 years.
I predict another few decades and the KJVO people will be KJVSO (Scofield) people.
So what is your solution for those of us who only speak English?
Well said! I am in complete agreement.
I'd recommend the Authorized Version (KJ), or Young's Literal Translation (for the NT), or the KJV2000, or the NKJV, all of which for the most part reproduce an accurate translation of the NT for English readers.
My personal likes and dislikes are simply not relevant.
I am fortunate to be able to read Greek well enough to bypass translations. Not everyone has the time or desire to acquire that skill. I sympathize.
I have the Bible in over 40 translations, and my two favorite Catholic translations are the Ronald Knox translation and the Jerusalem Bible. :thumbsup:
I cannot see how you place in the same 'category, 'translations' like the KJAV and the rest of the 'KJ's'.
I don't know them all --- the one is as 'good or bad' as the other --- you could just as well have classed NIV with the last group.
I saw changes - blatant ones - being introduced into 'translations' and 'versions' through the last part of the last century. I also noticed this development from Bibles of before 'my time'. I grew up with the 1933 Afrikaans Bible, and first time ever, noticed significant CHANGES when the NIV was placed in the pews of the church I attended.
The 'new versions' EXPLAINED IT ALL! I did not 'discover' the CHANGES; they 'discovered' - yea, BETRAYED - themselves!
I IMMEDIATELY brought these changes to the attention of my 'church' of then, the Seventh-day Adventist church.
I was treated like a leper ever since.
The SECTS are the servants of the 'mainline churches' in the RAPE of the Written Word of God. They are ALL JUST the same - the usurpers of the position of God on earth. And it NOWHERE shows clearer, than in mainly the New Testament Scriptures regarding "THE TIMES AND LAW OF GOD".
More prominent CHANGE and PERVERSION of the Scriptures than in Matthew 28:1, Mark 15:42 et al of the same kind, could not be found. And the fault does not lie in the 'text'; it lies in the quasi 'translations'!
You are right.
In fact, the changes involve a number of agendas, surprisingly, both Jewish and German:
The RCs and German Protestants want to remove all Jewishness from the Bible. In that quest, they have done this:
As a followup to Kittle's anti-Semitic distortion of the Bible, we can see a typical example of removal, deletion, and fudging of key Biblical terms which identify and explain the history of Israel and the Jews.
Here modern versions, following the Nazi Kittle, remove "House of Israel" from the NIV:
The House of Israel and the New Bibles, with a comparison of KJV vs NIVs
The 'house of Israel' is a term used frequently in the pre-shoah bibles, but adds to the number of jewish related terms that show great changes in the modern bibles. While the pre-shoah pattern holds stead until the NLT in 1971, the paraphrase takes a nosedive in literally omitting the phrase. The pattern though is not absolutely straight forward: the NIV,NRSV, NKJV and the NIRV seem to hold the same approach as the pre-shoah bibles on this term, but the paraphrases and others dramatically decrease. The effects are approaching significance at a 95% Confidence Interval with a two tailed ttest comparison of pre and post Shoah Bibles, but show clear significance at a 90% CI. (Recall that even a trend is important when dealing with widely ranging variances, and most likely a Welch's would be significant even at 95% because of adjustments for widely differing variances).
What this does show again is an effect following the institution and widening use of Kittel's Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, especially after its increased use in the US. While one study is of course never definitive, almost all comparisons of standard Jewish reference terms show a change, even if not statistically significant, which matters to translators and those wishing an excellent transmission of the Word of God.
The following is a summary of the t test comparison:
Unpaired t test results-HOUSE OF ISRAEL FOR PRE AND POST (includes 2011 NIV, and uses consensus by BLB and BST)
P value and statistical significance:
The two-tailed P value equals 0.0717
By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be not quite statistically significant.
The mean of pre minus post equals 70.55
95% confidence interval of this difference: From -7.19 to 148.28
This result is significant with a 90% Confidence Interval
Intermediate values used in calculations:
t = 1.9605
df = 13
standard error of difference = 35.983
Review your data:
Group pre post
Mean 146.00 75.45
SD 0.82 70.27
SEM 0.41 21.19
N 4 11
One last 'visual comparison though is that of the NIV translations, including the recent 2011 version, compared by raw count to the KJV: this is not of itself a test for superiority, but rather a 'landmark': two take the approach it would appear of the modern paraphrases, including the latest, while the others do not:
Further consideration is of the essence, but I will leave it there for this brief entry. The entirety of the 7 study series will be presented at a Baylor Conference in April by myself in a paper session. ekbest
Posted by Elizabeth K. Best, PhD
Of which above post I could understand the top three lines. But that was good enough, thanks.