"Vorlage" text...

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by robycop3, Aug 21, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    We have often discussed the differences between Isaiah 61:1-3 & Isaiah 42:7 and Luke 4:16-21. Dr. Cassidy is of the opinion that Jesus was reading aloud from a vorlage Hebrew text in use at the time. Can anyone elaborate on this? (I believe DC is on vacation in Palm Springs, according to his posts on another board)

    ( I hope he returns in time to add to this discussion.)

    I understand there was a vorlage Hebrew text used to make the LXX, but I don't know anything further. Any assistance will be appreciated.
     
    #1 robycop3, Aug 21, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2006
  2. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    here's a piece fr Dictionary.com:

    [​IMG]

    :D

    ok, it's the presumed (cos ain't nobody's ever seen it) underlying text of any translation, in this case the LXX. one explanation of why Jesus' quotes fr the OT r different fr our reading of the same is that the underlying Hebrew Vorlagen[?] r different--i.e. the Masoretic Text that's most popularly used today reads differently in some places than the Hebrew text used by the LXX translators n (presumably) by Christ. it's one of a number of plausible explanations.
     
    #2 Forever settled in heaven, Aug 21, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 21, 2006
  3. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Thanx for your answer!

    Those who insist that God has preserved His EXACT WORDS must acknowledge that Jesus put the stamp of authenticity upon whatever version He read aloud by both reading it and calling it Scripture. Thus, we have at least two versions in use...the masoretic Text, and the version from which Jesus read.

    I don't know if there's any more info about the version Jesus used, and I was wondering if anyone here knew if it was still extant, or anything else about it. Or, were parts of it preserved in the Old Testament quotes found in the New Testament, & that's all we have?
     
  4. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    roby, I'm fairly sure somewhere there is some monastary or church that will be more than happy to show you the 'actual scroll from which Jesus read' , as their prized relic. :rolleyes: And after you've seen it, get back with me and I've got you a great deal on some choice "Oceanfront Property" right here in the Bluegrass region of Central KY, equal to or probably even better than some "Whitewater Oceanfront property" one could have found a few years ago in Central Arkansas! :smilewinkgrin: :laugh: :laugh:

    Ed
     
  5. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Good! I'll place the deed in my safe deposit box right next to my deeds for my West Virginia beachfront and for the Brooklyn Bridge.

    Fact is, Jesus read SOMETHING aloud that wasn't the Masoretic Text. Wonder what it was, and if it's still extant at least as as a copy somewhere.
     
  6. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    n where have all the KJBOs gone when we need them?

    here's a perfect opportunity for them to correct Jesus for taking a NON-Onlyist position in terms of texts n versions!
     
  7. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    VT Only???


    Great question!!

    :rolleyes: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

    Ed
     
  8. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    And Paul certainly was quoting something other than the MT in Romans 3:10-18.

    These two examples alone should be sufficient for anyone who is searching for the truth to immediately reject the MT/TR onlyism.

    Where are the KJVO proponents? I would like to know how they deal with these texts.

    Is it as simple as "forget the Hebrew and Greek and stick to the KJV?"
     
  9. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    VT-Only!

    Amen, brother! If [snip] was good enough for Moses and Paul, it's good enough for me! :rolleyes:

    :smilewinkgrin:


    Naw, wait a minute! I'm for VT Only! :laugh; :laugh:
    Ed
     
    #9 EdSutton, Aug 24, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 24, 2006
  10. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Once again we must be reminded folks. This will not be a KJVO discussion.
     
  11. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why not?

    This is a versions/translation forum, and the one burning issue that is dividing the church is the issue of KJVOnlyism. Now if the Vorlage Text and the LXX dispute their claim, why not discuss it.

    You seem to be very concerned that these issues not be discussed. Why is that?

    The Scriptures warn us to watch out for those who cause division in the church. The KJVO issue is causing much division in the church. You don't want to discuss that?

    The facts are that the practice of the NT writers and Jesus himself differ radically from what proponents of the KJVO doctrince practice.

    Again, I ask you why on a Baptist Forum in the translation/versions section, we aren't allowed to discuss the doctrine of KJV onlyism.

    Could you elaborate for us?

    Thanks and blessings!
     
  12. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Yup - we are not going to let every discussion become a KJVO discussion. We have been over this ad infinitum. The topic is far too divisive and there are plenty of places to discuss this issue.

    There is plenty to discuss without returning to this topic over and over again.
     
  13. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry to offend anyone, C4K, with my attempts at humor about all this. And FTR, I don't think I've taken "any sides" on this, aside from making jokes about any and all. In fact, I believe I have basically "asked" you at least twice to close a thread on the subject. Truthfully, I'm not sure this question of "Vorlage text" fits that bill. I believe there are at least, a couple of times that Jesus, and perhaps Paul, did not exactly quote form either the LXX or the Masoretic textform. So I do assume it is a legitimate question, despite my squawks at humor in response to some other posts. am I right on the cirtings, even if out to sea with the humor. I'm not a language scholar with enough language skills to know for myself. Thanks,

    Ed
     
  14. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    The question is legit.

    Bringing KJVO into the discussion is not.
     
  15. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    i respectfully havta disagree.

    why talk abt the theory n doctrine n avoid the major application of it simply becos it divides sheep fr goats? can't we let the chips fall? or must Christians defend an agenda of placating some aberrant but vocal minority--aberrant becos in this case the Onlyist position (be it KJBO or Vulgate-Onlyist) contravenes Jesus' own position (n Paul's n Peter's, etc.).

    if we're truly concerned abt divisiveness, we shd indeed confront KJBOism with the Scriptures properly studied, interpreted, AND applied.
     
  16. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, with respect, the BB is the only group I am a member of. So just for my own information purposes, If I wished to "discuss this issue" (which I assure you, I don't) in what specific forum would I do this on the BB? Not here apparently, and with the 'free-for-all' forum (more fitting, perhaps?? :rolleyes:) not receiving any new posts (and with only one thread showing, to boot) what's left??? Politics?? Or is this the BB 'PC' system? I would like to know, if I might.

    Ed
     
  17. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

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

    The discussion of KJVO is a done deal. We have found it far to inflammatory and virtually impossible to police. We have tried allowing it within guidelines, but moderating that required more time and diligence than anyone can give.

    KJVO will not be a topic of discussion. The only other option is to close the Versions/Translations forum completely.

    Now that we are totally off topic, lets return to the topic of the OP or close the thread.

    Roger
     
  18. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Surely there's some extant copy of a ms from which JESUS READ ALOUD, isn't there? As I said in the OP, Doc Cassidy & a few others believe it was a vorlage Hebrew text, while others believe it was the LXX. Gawrsh, whatta mystery!
     
  19. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    The inflammatory remarks are certainly there by some.

    I disagree with you as well. The major application of what this thread is about pertains directly to KJVO position.

    What I hear you saying is that the KJVO issue engenders so much animosity/divisivness that BB (you?) doesn't want to be a forum for the discussion of this issue. Is this correct?

    There seems to be something tragic about all of this. I'm not quite sure what that is yet.

    I did learn something from this thread and the other one I started about "errors in the KJV?" That one got shut down rather quickly and it was tame, IMO, too.

    Nevertheless, I did learn something.

    You might want to remember that though this topic has been discussed ad infinitum, some of us have just started to look into this. So for us, it isn't ad infinitum.

    Blessings.
     
  20. kubel

    kubel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the proper thing to do would be to create a KJVO subforum within BV/T. This way the people that want to discuss the issue can, and the people who don't want to even see the threads that discuss the issue can just not visit that subforum.

    The discussions are valid to this forum since the doctrine of KJVO is both acceped and rejected with Baptist churches today (in other words, BB members represent believers and unbelievers of this issue). The discussions are heated, and many errors and truths are exposed without sugar coating. But personal attacks should never be acceptable.

    I would volunteer as one of the moderators of this new subforum if it were considered, and I'm sure others would also volunteer in order for this issue to be discussed freely here.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...