1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why The Need?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Baptist4life, Jan 28, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    You seem to only want to hear one side and view anything that disagrees with you as an attack.

    I have never shown any disrespect for you or been unfriendly to you. I simply question your point of view.

    Can you point out one single instant where I have been unfriendly, mean, or un-Christlike in a post?


    BTW, please not that your OP started the discussion when it made the KJV the basis for comparison.

     
    #61 NaasPreacher (C4K), Jan 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 30, 2009
  2. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    It is true that there have been a lot of new versions in the past 100 or so years. However, it does not seem to be disproportional when compared with the explosion of ALL published material beginning with major advancements in printing related technologies of the 20th century. You might be surprised to discover the number of different versions originating in the years 1680 - 1880, despite the hardships of publishing during this era. Why so focused on the past 50 years?
     
  3. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    3
    Just as a point of history, even when there was essentially only one English version- the KJV- there were "problems and fighting amongst Christians."
     
  4. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    My interest in this thread has nothing to do with KJVO. Surely after 2 1/2 years on this board, people know I'm not KJVO.

    My interest is in contending for the faith once delivered. It concerns me that the main goal of bible publishing today seems to be for nothing more than big profits. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but I think it's a possibility. And if money is the motivation, then God's word takes a back seat and it is possible that correct doctrine can be compromised.
    Just as Franklin posted a few weeks ago about a new version called "The Voice", which I personally thought was a complete distortion of God's word.

    When talking about the many versions published in the early days of the English bible, I'm not convinced they were really different "versions" since they used Tynedale's work as their text. They were basically Tynedale's translation but had different notes in the margins. Is that really a different version?

    I'm not saying that we should take away anyone's right to print whatever they want. I'm just saying we should not accept everything that comes down the pike as valid just because it's called a bible.

    JMHO.
     
  5. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,695
    Likes Received:
    82
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :applause: :applause: :applause:
     
  6. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Bishop's, Geneva, and KJV are not just adjustments to Tyndale, there are true translations in their own right.

    Marketing comes into play - that is why even the KJV is done in a variety of formats and study notes. However I think it is painting with a broad brush to say that the multiplicity of versions is just to make more money. After all, Bible publishers are still making a fortune on the KJV as well. Only a few ministries give KJVs away, the rest are making a profit.

    I don't know of anyone here who calls a version valid just because it is called a Bible. Do you really think that folks think that way?
     
  7. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    I have read that they all are based on Tyndale's translation. Maybe I misunderstood.


    I never said any of that. I have no problem with publishers selling bibles. I have no problem with various study bibles. I never said that the multiplicity of versions in ONLY to make money. Did you even read my post? I said it's a concern I have. It's something we should consider. I am not so naive to think that it's impossible.



    I didn't say it was anyone here. But yes, people (in general) flock to new versions. The same marketing techniques that are used to sell bibles are used to sell toothpaste. If they can convince you that what you have is inferior to their new and improved product, they've got you. Bible sales is big business. Make no mistake about that.
     
  8. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,695
    Likes Received:
    82
    Faith:
    Baptist
    People in my church are free to use whatever Bible version they like, and they do! What this leads to is the exact opposite of what everyone says that all these versions are good at.............clarifying God's Word.

    In our current Bible study we're all using different versions. Total confusion! No one can agree on what a particular verse is saying.....some read one way, some read another.......some don't have the verse, etc. That is NOT beneficial, and causes doubt amongst the people on just who's version is right? Don't you think Satan loves that?

    And I AM NOT promoting one version over another, I'm just saying that all the versions we have are causing more harm than good, IMHO.
     
  9. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Amy, here is your quote

    You state this as fact, or at the very least your strong opnion.

    Would you hold this same 'goal' for all those who print various study Bibles, formats, and bindings of the older versions.

    The problem with this argument is that it appears to judge the hearts of men for doing what they do. Is Bible marketing abused? Of course it is, but is that the main goal? I think that is hard to prove.
     
  10. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    4
    My quote says the I am concerned. Is that wrong?

    Yes. Read my thread about "out of control".
    Study bibles are great. I have several. But printing bibles to appeal to every individual under the sun? Duct tape bible? Sports bibles? Really C4K, this is ridiculous.


    I'm not trying to prove anything. Just saying it's something to be aware of.
    I'm not judging hearts either. Just stating my opinion. I think you are judging my heart though.
     
  11. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    I am sorry that you feel that way. What did I say to make you feel that I was judging your heart?

    I have been discussing the topic of the OP - not any individual.
     
    #71 NaasPreacher (C4K), Jan 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 30, 2009
  12. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    In a sense, nearly all English Bibles owe a debt to Tyndale; but especially these: Tyndale's own (1526 & 1534), Matthew's, Bishops', KJV, ERV, RSV, ASV, NRSV, NKJV, and finally now the ESV.

    Early English translations 'borrowed' extensively from previous versions for various reasons: sometimes I think it was just to expedite the process (could have been a marketing concern), sometimes because they simply couldn't really improve upon the difficult passages, and sometimes just to retain a familiar 'sound' for their potential readership (also a marketing ploy). But also as a result, they retained a lot of really good renderings. Be aware that these early versions are very different in places as well.
     
    #72 franklinmonroe, Jan 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 30, 2009
  13. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    The facts are that only one version has withstood all the controversies over the years. Some will taught a fav version over another, but only one withstands that "fav" thing, too.

    Some one may prefer another version as it seemingly "speaks" to them more, but the problem ensues when delineations from the harmony exist and then, we should all revert back to that which is proven, tried, and true.

    Y'know.....:godisgood:

    We don't need to play the game of trying to update the Bible to the intrinsic nature of an ever evolving language. Why is this? The English maintains its root meanings devoid of any corruptions which comes from modernizations in vernacular. Those modernizations are usually slang in nature and also relate to immoral indications as the society is degrading into apostacy.

    I know my remarks are not well taken, and B4life is justified in his feelings, but why is it the MV proponents operate from the bitternesses they contracted from "KJVO's" that were somewhat venomous?

    Why be so irrational? My comments are rational and guess what? They're RIGHT!:laugh: :thumbs:
     
  14. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amy, if you really think all the older translations after Tyndale were basically the same with different notes, why don't you take a look at some of the older translations? You can find many of them online at http://www.study;oight.org.

    I agree with you in this respect, Amy. Even though there are many legitimate Bible translations out there we still find some I wouldn't consider to be the Bible - the Klingon Version, the Cotton Patch Version, the New World Translation (Jehovah's Witnesses), the Joseph Smith Translation or Inspired Version (Mormons) and the Clear Word Translation (Seventh-Day Adventists) I wouldn't really consider "Bibles." The NWT, the JST and the CWT, I believe, were "translated" so errant cults could finally have "Scripture" that agrees with their false teachings. These deliberate mistranslations were done with an agenda in mind, and that was to make "Scipture" say what it had never said before. As for the Klingon Version (no one actually speaks this fictional language) and the Cotton Patch Version (C'mon, Atlanta and Birmingham in the Bible? Ya gotta be kidding!), I believe they were merely attempts to make a few bucks for their writers and/or publishers.
     
  15. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sal, this isn't a KJVO thread, so let's keep it that way. If you want to promoite KJVOism, go to another thread or start one yourself. Your "only one version" comments seem to be designed to hijack this thread just as you've hijacked many others in the past. Let it go, Sal!
     
  16. Salamander

    Salamander New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    3,965
    Likes Received:
    0
    You "let it go", I have every right as a BB member to post in any forum on BB open to Baptists.

    As far as the "hijacking"? I hadn't mentioned KJVO in that fashion.

    You've got a strange feddish about me, you know?

    I remarked on the issue of why so many versions. I excercised my member privilege with a response. Deal with the response and get off your high-horse. Of course your's may be so high that it will take a stepladder:tongue3:

    Better vhange this or you might get accused of making every topic a "KJVO" hijacking
     
  17. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    This is a good post! :thumbsup:

    To be frank, I love all the different Bibles! I have several and am grateful to be in a country where I can own several.

    There may be a lot of marketing going on, but we live in a capitalist country. I was raised to think that was a good thing. It has its bad side but we can't complain about too many Bibles unless we want to go to socialism.
     
  18. Jim1999

    Jim1999 <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    1
    You forgot the Bible in Cockney. Then, it was made in that socialist England. It must have a devious end, indeed. Nevermind it was written to encourage the youth of East London to read the Bible.

    "And so Jesus made a Jim Skinner for 5,000 geezers with just five loaves of Uncle Fred and two Lillian Gish...." One sample of Cockney.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  19. Deacon

    Deacon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    9,469
    Likes Received:
    1,228
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Blessinz of teh Ceiling Cat be apwn yu, srsly.
    The LOLCat Bible Translation Project is dedicated to translating the entire Bible into lolspeak.

    Lottsa likkum$ in maekin dees version!

    *********************

    So liek teh Ceiling Kitteh lieks teh ppl lots and he sez 'Oh hai I givez u me only kitteh and ifs u purrz wit him u wont evr diez no moar, k?'

    Cuz teh Ceiling Kitteh not snd hiz son 2 take all yur cookies, but so u cud maek moar cookies 4EVAR!

    U beleevz him u getz cheezburgrs, but els you get invisibul error.
    John 3:16-18 LOLCat Bible

    Rob
     
    #79 Deacon, Jan 30, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 30, 2009
  20. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sal, we have so many versions cuz there've been many TRANSLATORS, & the language changes with time.

    And there was little-to-no controversy until KJVO was created.

    Now, can you prove only ONE of these versions is valid, to the exclusion of all others? Of course you can't, & neither can I, nor anyone else.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...