Hooray!

Sister, all our English language contains words that need to be defined.:thumbsup:

Good point.:thumbsup:

 

OK I understand what you are saying Amy and I sincerely appreciate your concern. However, there are two difficulties with that proposition: first; a literal word-for-word translation from either Greek or Hebrew would be very difficult to understand.

Both langauges are "idiomatic" that means there are anomolies in each that are exclusive to their derivative languages (Sanscrit and Aramaic).

For instance ancient semitic laguages have no present tense, in fact there is no past or future tense either. Perfect and Imperfect tense function as simple past and future. In reality - complete or incomplete action.

And many other grammatical differences which would seem strange to us.

Second, We the cloistered Christians are all well versed in Jacobean-Elizabethan 17th century English. However the 21st century man on the street is not.

The language of the NT is "koine" Greek. It was the common language of the hellenized world at the time of Christ as well as being the language of the common man. Attic Greek is the Greek of scholarship, koine is not.

This is what the modern versions are attempting to do, bring the Scripture back to the common man as God originally intended by moving away from the language of 17th century Great Britain.

Yes, this means that every generation needs at least a revision to the past generation's translation.

Here is an example of Jacobean English which would confuse the 21st century man:

We read in Matthew 26 at the Lord's Supper:

Matthew 26:27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;​

It looks to the modern reader that Christ is saying that they should drink everything in the cup.

Here is what He is actually saying from the koine:

NKJV Matthew 26:27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.​

And many other Jacobean structures which are viewed as oddities today.

But to tell you the truth, I wouldn't feel as if it were Christmas without the nativity readings of the KJV.

But I am a "churched" person and I speak Jacobean.

Amy, please don't take offense, as far as I am concerned this is not an argument but a sharing of our knowledge for our common edification.

Thanks
Hank

 

Only the following words are unfamiliar to me and need defining
despoil
dirge
portico
satraps
teraphim The rest I learned from my KJV and a dictionary except where i already knew others.


Why is it modern versionists decry the need to define words as some sort of justification against the KJV!:smilewinkgrin:

 

My understanding of the contents of the cup were to be completely taken into consideration what the Blood of Christ has done, not as the literal meaning would appear to be a cup filled with a beverage.

There alone the KJV is best.

I just preached from this passage on claiming the Blood: Jesus offered, it is up to us to claim what he's done for every man!:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

I'm glad they did the Updated version. I do not like the "thees" and "thous," which are just normal words from the 17th century, There is no need to use them today, but so many people think these words are sacred or something. There is nothing superior about 17th century English, except perhaps in the poetry sections of the Bible, where it reads more gracefully (imo).

 

I am the man on the street. I was not raised in church and was saved as a young adult of 22. I only started reading the KJV about a year ago after reading many other versions. So I had to learn the 17th century language at the age of 50.

I understand this and maybe I'm making too big a deal of it, but I am sincerely concerned for the future of our bibles.

I have to disagree with you on this. How many textbooks and literary works are there that were written 100 or more years ago and we don't update those to more modern language. Why is it we have to be constantly tampering with God's word?

I've never been confused by that but what do I know?
A little study and reading it in context would clear that right up.

I don't take offense at all. You are quite the gentleman. I appreciate all of your posts. :wavey:

 

Amy here is my last comment and I think you will probably appreciate it.

I think we both (at least myself) have forgotten that we are talking about the Word of God.

Concerning the Bible, Spurgeon commenting on trying to defend it said:

HankD

 

I know how he feels. This isn't only true of the KJV, though. When I preach, a lot of my time is spent in explaining what is being said because of the time and cultural differences. Adding in the Jacobean English just adds to it.

For Amy... If you want to see literal, trying reading from an interlinear sometime. An interlinear puts the English equivalent above each word/phrase of the original (I only have a Greek one). If you didn't know the verse you would be lost most of the time due to the sheer difference in the way it is written.

 

"I am sincerely concerned for the future of our bibles."

I have to agree, I believe that many translations are just the fad of the day designed to appeal to people who believe new is better.

I believe that the ESV has been updated twice since the original was published in 2001, did we really need to update the archaic language of 2001 into more modern 2009 English? Then you have all the different NIV spinoffs, two editions of the NASB, an NKJV and a KJVer et cetera.

I don't have any problem at all with sound new translations that address a real need, I just can't help but wonder if there isn't something else at work here.

 

How very elitist of you ! A good Pastor wants the congregation to leave with an understanding of the Word, not confused even more. Do you enjoy looking down upon others who do not have such a grasp on the English language?

Jacobean prose is no longer spoken, thus no longer learned, which is why people have such a hard time with the KJV.

I'll take that small list of words in the NASBu any day and come away understanding what I read, which is by far and away more important than anything else.

 

I agree with Rippon about the ESV. These smaller enhancements have been welcome, but there have been many, done almost rather stealth-like. I wish they'd just do a sweeping rehab and settle it.

By the way, glad to hear of what your pastor is doing, Rippon. While the NASB can be awkward, at least there's a legit reason, if you will, and not a slavery to inferior mss or centuries old verbage.