I believe it goes even further, “thou” and “ye” are always subjects, while “thee” and “you” are always objects.
How is the KJV a Bible translation in any different sense than the NKJV is?
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Logos1560, Jun 10, 2018.
Page 4 of 8
-
Jordan Kurecki Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
The question I see, then, is, if modern English has dropped the usage of these words, aren't there ways to convey the meaning using modern English?
Granted, it may require more than one English word per Greek word, which some find objectionable. -
The case and number of the pronouns can be easily identified in Greek, and the "thee, thou, thy, thine, ye, you" etc. of the KJV help to identify the case and number of the pronouns in English, which brings that often very valuable information from Greek into English.
There have been some suggestions put forth on a means to bring that information into the newer translations but so far none have been taken seriously.
The ASV of 1901 continued to use the old pronoun forms but it never really caught on with the bible reading public. But the updated ASV, the WEB, uses the generic "you."
Helpful things to remember.
“T” pronouns are singular (and always 2nd person)
Thou = subject form
Thee = object form
“Thy” & “Thine” show possession
“Y” pronouns are plural (and always 2nd-person)
Ye = Subject form
You = object form
“Your(s)” shows possession -
Genesis 9:4
shall you not eat (1611 London)
shall ye not eat (1660 London) [1760 Cambridge, 1769 Oxford]
Can you demonstrate that "you" is always used as an object at Genesis 45:8 in most KJV editions?
Genesis 45:8 [see Matt. 10:20, Mark 13:11--it is not ye that speak; Ps. 55:13] [you sent not--1560 Geneva; it was not ye that sent--1602 Bishops]
it was not ye that sent (1675 Oxford) (1660 London) (1809 Dublin)
it was not you that sent (1715, 1769 Oxford, SRB) [1629 Cambridge, DKJB] -
-
-
-
Y1,
I can't help this, I have to do it....
Here's a comparison for you to see from the NASB:
" Have this attitude [e]in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus,
6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be [f]grasped,
7 but [g]emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, [and] being made in the likeness of men.
8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death [h]on a cross." ( Phillippians 2:5-8, NASB )
" Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." ( Philippians 2:5-8, AV )
Do you see the differences?
It's because of the manuscript differences that you see the translation differences.
Now, which passage glorifies Jesus Christ as God, and which one calls Him a liar and a pretender? -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Although it would then also point to the HS not having a strong translation preference. -
One can use the Nas/Nkjv/Esv among others, and there are NO watering down of doctrines to be found in any of them. -
-
-
-
-
Jordan Kurecki Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Comparing most of the newer English translations, I find the same or a similar rendering of the NASB in nearly all of them, except the NKJV and a very few others )...which makes Jesus out to be a liar and a pretender when compared to passages in the Gospels which clearly show Him as being God in the flesh.
Here's the same passage in the ESV, which I've shortened to just verse 6:
" who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped," ( Philippians 2:6, ESV )
Now let's add some other translations:
" Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;" ( Philippians 2:6, NIV )
" who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage." ( Philippians 2:6, HSB ( Holman ) )
" who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped," ( Philippians 2:6, RSV )
" who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped. " ( Philippians 2:6, ASV-1901 )
So how it is not a manuscript problem? -
-
Jordan Kurecki Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
For example, Lebron James does not consider professional basketball status as something to be grasped. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Recently, however, some bright chap has analysed all its appearances in Greek literature and shown that it means something held to one's advantage, like a 'get out of jail free' card in Monopoly. It pains me to say it, but only the NIV 2011 (being the most recent translation) gets it more or less right.
As usual, I am open to correction by those whose knowledge of Greek is either better or more up-to-date than mine.
Page 4 of 8