Weren't Both The RV/ASV seen as Update/Revision Of KJV?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by JesusFan, Sep 7, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    As even those like Dean Burgureon believed that the RV was a 'good" update to the KJV?

    And the ASV was American version of the RV, so wouldn't the NSV really be seen as an update today for the ole KJV?
     
  2. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,126
    Likes Received:
    320
    Not exactly, Burgon believed the AV needed revision and was part of the committee which commissioned Wescott and Hort to do that revision.

    However when W&H finished their work Burgon strongly criticised it and even wrote a book The Revision Revised lambasting them.

    Most modern translations including RV, ASV and the NIV descend from W&H 's revision.

    Basically Burgon was a champion of the "Traditional Text" and published many support books and articles as to why traditional texts alone should be used for translation work.

    W&H relied heavily upon mss Alexandrinus and Vaticanus (Alexandrian mss) to produce their revision, something to which Burgon objected and wrote against for the remainder of his life.

    The Textus Receptus (TR - Received Text) was distilled from the Majority Text with some variations here and there.


    HankD
     
    #2 HankD, Sep 13, 2011
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2011

Share This Page

Loading...