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!

Featured These Men Are Responsible For Our Modern Versions

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Martin Andrews, Mar 29, 2017.

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

    Rob_BW Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,324
    Likes Received:
    1,246
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You're being very...Socratic today. It's making things very interesting.
    :)
     
  2. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I hope its nothing else!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,896
    Likes Received:
    2,125
    Faith:
    Baptist
    We have the promise of the Lord Jesus Christ in John 16:13-14. The Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of truth (John 14:17) will guide us into all truth, taking the things of Christ and declaring them to us. He does this through the Bible (cf. Hebrews 3:7; 10:15-18 etc.). We may therefore be certain that the Bible we hold in our hands is sufficient to lead us into all truth.

    This was the opinion of the translators of the KJV. They wrote: 'We do not deny, nay, we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession........containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God [Preface of the Translators to the Reader, 1611]
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am trying to get him to think about where his knowledge comes from. Where his authority lies. So far no joy. :)
     
    • Like Like x 3
  5. The Parson

    The Parson Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    4
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not sure altogether. Are you familiar with the lamentations of Dr. Frank Logsdon? Sounds like a bible book in it's self, doesn't it? Anyway, he was a member of the translation committee for the NASB. One of his noted statements was to publisher of that version saying; "I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard." Why do you suppose he would say such?

    Of course, the Lockman Foundation quickly disavowed him "after" his death. It's a shame a company, corporation, or in this case, foundation would stoop to such. Surprise, surprise. You'd think they would have done that while he was alive and causing them so much financial damage.

    Neither here nor there, however. That doesn't answer your question. Besides the use of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus codex's, the real biased is in the footnotes. Instead of giving us a good chain reference bible, the translators as a whole slip in notes like: many mss do not contain this verse, some ancient mss do not contain, the earliest mss read, not found in the most of the old mss, etc., etc., etc. These guys didn't even trust their handy dandy fix it all bible. Reminds me of W.C. Fields reading the Bible on his death bed looking for loopholes. With footnotes like that, you'll find those loopholes because you wouldn't know what verse to trust.

    But the ESV? I'll have to study on that subject. But I hear the latest update will be a version John Calvin would be proud of? Is that true?
     
  6. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This is a myth that has been going around the internet for a long time. It has been said that it originated with my friend David Sorenson. (I went to Seminary with David's younger brother Steve.)

    However, insofar as I have been able to ascertain, it was quoted by David but did not originate with him.

    Here is the truth:

    "The Board of Directors of The Lockman Foundation launched the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE translation work in the late 1950’s following the completion of the AMPLIFIED NEW TESTAMENT. Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon was acquainted with Dewey Lockman, president of The Lockman Foundation, prior to Mr. Lockman’s death in 1974.

    Mr. Logsdon was never a member of the Board of Directors, nor was he an employee of The Lockman Foundation. Mr. Logsdon had no authority to hire employees or translators for the Foundation, to set policy, to vote, to hold office, to incur expenses, etc.

    He cannot be considered “co-founder” of the NASB, nor part of The Lockman Foundation, nor part of the NASB translation team, nor did he write the forward of the NASB. According to our records, he was present at board meetings on two occasions — once to hear a travel report; and once to deliver an “inspirational thought.”
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Neither the NASB nor the ESV used the Sinaiticus or Vaticanus codices.

    The Greek text underlying the NASB is Eberhard Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece, 23rd edition in the 1971 original, and the 26th in the 1995 revision.

    The ESV is based on the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, 4th edition and Novum Testamentum Graece (27th ed.), edited by Nestle and Aland.

    As the ESV is a revision of the RSV it could be argued that much of the original translation was based on the 7th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek text for the New Testament.
     
  8. The Parson

    The Parson Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    4
    Faith:
    Baptist
    As for the quote sir, I wouldn't just outright say you're in error, but I really don't believe it's the case. And the Novum Testamentum Graece was a compendium containing the texts of Westcott and Horts work where you find -------- Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Am I incorrect? And forgive the misspelling of codices. Misspelling, an East Tennessee flaw.
     
    #48 The Parson, Mar 30, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2017
  9. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    because our joy is only to be found in the Lord!
     
  10. The Parson

    The Parson Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    4
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And in the fact that God will preserve His Word, despite man's wisdom or lack thereof!

    1 Corinthians 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. 3:20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    These two Greek manuscripts are corrupt in some places, but overall do represent the Bible that we have today. When comparing modern versions based on these Mss, with the KJV, the difference is not that great. Both Westcott and Hort, like the other "revisers", Lightfoot, Ellicott, etc, were brilliant scholars, and their commentaries, especially Joseph Lightfoot, and a masterpiece. Sadly then abandoned the text of the KJV,m which is far superior, and preserved by God. Two very important passages come to mind, 1 Timothy 3:16, "God was manifest in the flesh..."; and 1 John 5:7, "the are Three Who bear Witness in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and These Three are one"; which are beyond any doubt in the original Autographs.
     
  12. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Indeed, God will make sure of this!
     
  13. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I think you failed to understand the point.
     
  14. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Then you continue to believe a myth which has been completely disproved.

    Aleph and B were certainly used to redact both NA and UBS. But other manuscripts representing the Alexandrian textform were also consulted.

    Well, the point was that the codices have been in museums since the late 1800s. What was used for the ERV of 1881 was a printed Greek text edited by Westcott and Hort along with others.

    The only connection the ESV could have to the text redacted by Westcott and Hort would be the tenuous relation dating back to the ASV of 1901 which was supposedly revised into the RSV which was, in turn, revised into the ESV.
     
  15. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree the reading "God" is much better attested than "he who."

    And how did you come to that conclusion? What evidence are you aware of that makes the reading such a certainty?

    The reading found in the KJV and other versions based on the TR is found only in eight late manuscripts, four of which have the words in a marginal note. Most of these manuscripts (2318, 221, and [with minor variations] 61, 88, 429, 629, 636, and 918) originate from the 16th century; the earliest manuscript, codex 221 (10th century), includes the reading in a marginal note which was added sometime after the manuscript was copied. Thus, there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek manuscript until the 1500s; each such reading was apparently composed after Erasmus’ Greek NT was published in 1516.

    Indeed, the reading appears in no Greek witness of any kind (either manuscript, patristic, or Greek translation of some other version) until AD 1215 (in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant, since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. The reading seems to have arisen in a fourth century Latin homily in which the text was allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity. From there, it made its way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman Catholic Church.

    There is some gender discordance when the reading is left out, but that can be fairly easily explained.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I know what you said. My response is, that, unless we KNOW the Lord we will never fully trust Him or His Word.
     
  17. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This study answers your concerns, http://www.trinitystudies.org/Trinity/1jn5.6-10.pdf
     
  18. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't want somebody else's study. I want yours. How did you come to the conclusion that the comma was "beyond any doubt in the original Autographs?"
     
  19. Martin Andrews

    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    130
    Likes Received:
    10
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I agree with everything it says, and could not better it! By the way, the Greek for 1 Timothy 3:16 in versions like the NIV, is "ὃς" which is "who" and not "he who".
     
  20. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,080
    Likes Received:
    3,491
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You have missed the point. It has nothing to do with knowing the Lord. Yeshua1 knows the Lord (as much as we can ever tell about such things) and to suggest he does not know the Lord is a violation of BB rules.

    He makes a lot of posts which are just stated as his opinions. I am trying to get him to support his opinions using the Scriptures. Opinions are like armpits. Everybody has a couple of them and most of them stink.

    His opinions carry little to no weight on the BB. But the Scriptures are our supreme and final authority in all matters of faith, practice, and understanding. Using Scripture instead of mere opinion will give him much more credibility on the BB. :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...