Have MV's caused more confusion than good?

This first part's for MexDeaf, the rest isn't. Save your cash, unless you really want a paper version. Here's the 1611 w/ Apocrypha for e-Sword: 1611 KJV

You'll have to scroll on down to find it, but it's there.

Now, onto the subject at hand, dealing with the "lies" in the NASB:

I would strongly suggest you read the translators' notes as to why they translated it the way they did. Since I doubt that you will, I'll post them for you:

John 5:31: "Is not true" I.e. admissible as legal evidence In law, the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case. Then, you follow up in the following verse with those who testified of him: The Father, John the Baptizer

Jesus is saying that his testimony is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. (Curing the leprosy in particular, which is a direct sign of God; so much so that it was against Jewish law to even try to cure it because that would be a sign of the Messiah.)

So, the Father and Son are the two witnesses, as we see in John 8:17. It's a paradox, but it's true.

However, Jewish law demands proof outside himself. He has given the witness of another (the Father; John 5:32 and 5:37), but he also has the witness of John the Baptizer, in John 5:33.

He gives the witness of works in John 5:36:

Then, the witness of Moses in John 5:45.

So, let's see what the NASB translators have to say about John 8:14: First of all, they reference us to John 18:37, Revelation 1:5, and Revelation 3:14. Here, he's witness for the Truth, the faithful witness, and the faithful and true witness respectfully.

Found any more "lies" in the NASB so far?

Let's continue. Jesus says his testimony is true (or valid).

Then, he says that he knows where he comes from and where he's going and the translators reference us to John 8:42, 13:3, and, 16:28 where he came forth, and is arriving from God, come forth from and went to God, and came forth from the father, came into the world, and going to the Father.

Do you have your new list of lies written down so far?

But, you don't know where I came from or where I'm going. The translators here refer us to John 7:28 and 9:29, where he's talking to a different group that does know from whence he comes and where he's going and then talking to a group that says they are disciples of Moses, but don't know from whence Jesus is.

OK, now: Do you have your new list of lies to present?

 

This is a perfect example of why you should toss your stupid Greek education out the window.

He took exactly 19 words to say what God said in the KJV with only 4 words.

yeesh!

 

Actually, the use of TCassidy's "stupid Greek education" is one of the greatest supports for the usage of the manuscripts underlying the KJV on this board.

Talk about shooting your allies!

 

Or, you could just get a fasimili reprint for a fraction of the price.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1565631609/?tag=baptis04-20

 

And no, I do not think that modern English translations of the Bible cause confusion. I do find that lack of studying leads to ignorance which results in confusion. I find the Interlinear Bibles and resources at http://www.studylight.org to be very helpful in ending ignorance which reduces confusion.

 

It is quite obvious to those who have read their Bible at least once that there are those trying to make an argument for something founded in an position of ignorance and if they would simply just read their Bible they would have a good answer.

I find myself thinking if only that person would read their Bible. They spend more time listening to an ignorant preacher spew out ignorance and put on a show rather than try and find the truth. Some when they come to church just as they hang their coat on a hook they also check their brains at the door and call that spiritual. They are like Mormons who are told what to say and believe and do think ever think for themselves or study for themselves and ask questions. One of the things I often find is that those people have a need to be controlled because other things in their life are out of control. Often their out of control issues are noticed when they are confronted because their "pillars" are threatened. They get mad and when they can't find fault with the truth then they try and find fault with the messenger.

 

I found it interesting what is on the bacl cover of McGrath's book In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0385722168/?tag=baptis04-20

The back cover describes the reason that the KJV came about was because of a political football.

"Indeed it was the popularity of the Geneva Bible, with its anti-royalist content, that eventually forced James I to sanction his own pro-monarchy, translation."

 

I read the reviews and this is supposed to be the same thing with the notes and so forth so I ordered one. Thanks for posting that!

 

I already feed, clothe, and house plenty of folks in Mexico so I don't feel too bad about spending some on something worthwhile like this. :thumbs:

Nevertheless, see my post above, thanks to TC I found and ordered one cheaper.

 

I assumed that fact was common knowledge. Politics "created strange bedfellows" even in the early 17th century.

 

It is amazing me 5to me today how much of that is going on among churches today.

Even when I first started pastoring I had two older pastors tell me not to share with other pastors what I was doing because I may lose members. I would tell them it is God's work not mine. The small church I was pastoring was a replant and God blessed the efforts of each person. When pastors asked what I was doing and I told them I was knocking on doors it ws interesting the responses I got. One older pastor in a neighboring town was encouraged and offered to go with me.

 

Chessic, you are correct that the two words do mean something a little different in English. "Sound" had (and has) many shades of meaning: free from defect, complete and unbroken, trustworthy, or firm and secure. "Discipline" means the training and control of conduct, usually for improvement.

But the underlying Greek word sophronismos (Strong's #4995) can mean both an admonishing or calling to soundness of mind, and to moderation and self-control. This is the only occurrence of this word in the New Testament. Many English readers would not suspect that there are multiple meanings of many Greek words except for their appearance in the various versions.

Therefore, while the KJV gives one translative interpretation of an ancient language word, frequently another version will give a rendering with an alternative nuiance. In other words, versions are not necessarily attempting to communicate the same thing just with 'modern'words, but in many cases are conveying something slightly or wholly different. In most "sound" efforts the translators work is honorable, just as the KJV revisors arrived at different words from the English Bibles that went before them.

We are unable to ask God's penmen about their original intents, thus it becomes very problematic to definitively state that one translation is absolutely perfect. Perhaps, after consideration and much study, you may favor one understanding of a word over the other in particular context, but casual reading generally will not suffice.

 

Maintaining a sound mind requires discipline: self-discipline coupled with Divine discipline.

If one will stick with the most reliable when it comes to English, he won't have to revert back to the Greek and Hebrew so often as to "understand" the Bible. All he'll have to do is take into consideration the context and maintain a teachable spirit which the Holy Ghost can then use that pliableness to work that which is seemly in the heart and mind of the child of God.

Seems all these "doctors" forget that the Holy Ghost, who guides us into all truth, is God.

 

Thank you for the explanation Franklin, though it sounds to me like discipline is the more accurate of the two choices. I was rooting for sound mind, lol.

I like the way you put that.

This is why I'm looking for the most reliable translation. If you have an opinion on the matter, feel free to pm me with it, since this thread may not support the start of that discussion.

 

People understood the Bible perectly enough before Westcot and Hort introduced their Greek texts. When some one introduces confusion into the mix, confusion continues to occur.

 

I'd rather be confused than in error, though not all would agree. We could eliminate all confusion and still have everyone wrong. I don't support sticking with a certain translation or group of texts just to relieve confusion, especially if error has crept up because of it. And confusion can encourage further study, which is healthy.

 

If that were the case then how would you interpret what Peter wrote in 2 Peter 3:15, 16?

"Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction."

Did Paul write some things which were hard to understand because there was more than one Greek translation of the OT?

 

That only happens when someone does not apply Acts 17:11.

 

Evidently, many folks misunderstood Askjo's assertion, by no fault of their own, since he refused to make his argument explicit. It wasn't about the phrases "is not true" and "is true". The two verses without context from the KJV --

If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. (John 5:31)
Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, [yet] my record is true:... (John 8:14a)​

What he is claiming is that the KJV escapes the appearance of contradiction because John 5 uses the English word "witness", while in chapter 8 the word "record" is used. This is an utterly ridiculous (desperate) semantic excuse. Any appeal that these two English words are NOT synonymous is tantamount to accusing the 1611 revisors of outright mistranslation; to render the same underlying Greek word (with very similar context) with dissimilar meaning English words would be undeniable error. No, the apparent contradiction still exists in the KJV; ask any Atheist, they'll be glad to show it to you.

The Greek verb martureo (Strong's #3140) means to bear witness, the action of giving testimony. The verb form then is actually two words in KJV English: "bear witness" and "bear record". The Greek noun marturia (Strong's #3141) is that which one testifies, the verbal testimony itself (i.e. before a judge). The KJV's less familar rendering of the verb form obscures clarity for contemporary English readers; commonly other versions use a verb form (like "testify") with a corresponding noun form (like "testimony"). For example --

If I {alone} testify about Myself, My testimony is not true. (John 5:31, NASB)
Jesus answered and said to them, "Even if I testify about Myself, My testimony is true,... (John 8:14a, NASB)​

The conjuction "if" has several uses depending on the intended meaning and can sometimes create ambiguities: "if" can indicate uncertainty, or "if" can be conditional, or "if" can be used in contrary-to-fact statements (hypothetical).

Regardless of the translation, carefull handling of the Word of God in context will reveal that there is no contradiction at all between these verses.