Would you consider your translation your final authority?

I have several versions on my shelf. I would consider any and all of them a "final authority" because of the care put into the translation.

 

I was "churched" for two to three decades and was not aware there was a Bible version controversy, so I can relate to your friends wife on that account. Yes, I consider the version I read to be my final authority.

 

Yes, because the Word of God is the final authority, and my translation is the Word of God. (No, mine isn't the KJV)

 

Amen, TomVols! :thumbs:

 

Yes, God's Word is my final authority.

 

The KJV is the AV. Yes, I have the final authority -- KJV!

 

I guess I get to break the flow.

No, I do not consider any one translation to be my final authority. The original manuscripts were inerrant, but translations are not. Practically, though, I do accept what I read in whatever version I use, unless I have compelling evidence that the translation is in error. In that case, I look to the Greek/Hebrew.

 

What they said! Ditto, ditto and ditto!

God has been gracious and has provided His word for us in various English translations. His word should always be our final authority whether we use one of the KJVs, the NKJV, the NASB or another translation. The particular English words used in a translation do not make the final authority, but God's word in whatever translation IS the final authority.

 

Do you mean that you have the final authority in the KJV because it is the "Authorised Version"? If so, perhaps you are not aware that it was called the "Authorised Version" because King James I authorised the work of translation, not on account of it being the "final authority".

 

As a fundamentalist, evangelical, Baptist, Christian, yes the Bible is my final authority for all faith and practice. Right now it happens to be the RVR since we speak Castellano here.

 

I make use of the critical texts with textual variants listed according to manuscript. Most of the time, a major difference in meaning isn't all that common. The general meaning behind a verse can come across fine. Other times, such as when the LXX and the MT diverge, I may not come down firmly on one side or another. Practically, though, some things can be translated in a few different ways (especially with Hebrew), so I think it is good to consult the Greek whenever the English translations may slightly diverge.

For me, the reason I cannot accept any English version as an infallible, inerrant final authority is because it would be a translation of other texts. For me, though, I'm not bothered by the fact that I don't have a 100% perfect translation of every single verse. We have solid knowledge of the majority of the text, and wherever texts conflict, we have to find the best text available. This is not a flawless process.

Scribal errors can often be detected by a comparison of a wide range of documents. I'm no professional textual critic, but I am familiar enough with textual criticism to understand how beneficial this can be. If a scribal error is present in all of the extant texts (which we could never prove), then we have no way of knowing and must simply trust what we have.

In short: we do not have perfect copies of the original manuscripts. However, Greek/Hebrew texts are closer to the originals than English texts because they have not gone through translation (with the exception of the LXX, but that's a different matter). I'd rather utilize what we have instead of worrying with having a definitive final authority in English. The early church did not have a complete copy of the Scriptures, and they grew in the Lord. We can do the same without a perfectly-transmitted copy of the originals.

 

I believe we must go beyond the strictly-secular thoughts and methods of our having such ancient worx as "The Iliad", whose extant copied match far less than the known Scriptural mss do, and not apply them too much to Scripture.

As Christians, we must TRUST GOD to have given us His word as HE has chosen to pass it on to us. Only HE knows who made what copies of what mss & exactly how accurate each one is or isn't. I believe that's why He has caused such an eclectic mix of such mss to be available to us. Knowing the subtleties & nuances of all languages, which He caused not to match, He has given us a variety of views of His word so we can put together some good working models that carry all the doctrines & messages He wants us to have. I don't believe He is limited to any one ms, set of mss, language, or version.

 

It is a version in the Spanish language, the Version` Santa Biblia Reine Valeria 1960, if I'm not mistaken.

Ed

 

Jesus is the final authority for me, no translation could replace him.

 

I use the KJV.

 

Actually, I don't believe that I am aware of any particular book that might help you on that. I'm sure several probably exist, but my knowledge has come from a variety of classes (Greek and Hebrew included) and bits and pieces out of various books and commentaries.

I've never read these, but they look like they might be what you're wanting.

Students Guide to Textual Criticism

New Testament Textual Criticism --I've not read this particular book, but he's a good NT scholar, Baptist, actually!