No manuscripts, no Bible?

KJV
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;

NKJV
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

ASV
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

NIV
1 Corinthians 15
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

NAS
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

RSV
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures,
4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures,

Douay-Rheims (Catholic)
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I delivered unto you first of all, which I also received: how that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures:
4 And that he was buried: and that he rose again according to the scriptures:

NAB
1 Corinthians 15
3 For I handed on to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures;
4 that he was buried; that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures;

VUL
1 Corinthians 15
3 tradidi enim vobis in primis quod et accepi quoniam Christus mortuus est pro peccatis nostris secundum scripturas
4 et quia sepultus est et quia resurrexit tertia die secundum scripturas

HankD

 

Now lets see that kind of proof for OTPLO preservation. (One translation per language only)

I have no issue with anyone putting their faith in one translation, but teaching that as a doctrine is an entirely different matter.

 

Hank,

I of course believe Jesus rose from the dead, thank God for that! But we all know that the same way, by faith in the Word of God that declares it. None of us were personal witnesses to it. Some here do not seem to be able to distinguish between faith and proven fact. If you can absolutely prove something, then that is not faith. Faith is believing something you have not seen, or cannot prove.

Well, I don't know what you mean by perfect. It is a historical fact that when the AV1611 went to print there were typographical errors. This is not the fault of the translators, and the fact that these errors were spotted and corrected shows there was an existing infallible standard.

And the errors between the Oxford and Cambridge editions were also obvious typographical errors.

http://www.kjv-only.com/rick/waites3errors.html

But again, the errors were made by the printers, not the translators and were quickly spotted and corrected because an infallible standard existed.

Tom Vos asked;

I agree with you 100% here. People often put faith in error. I am capable of doing the same thing like anyone else. But the KJV and the MVs are not the same. Now I will show a verse in the KJV and some MVs that give a very different meaning that affects important doctrine.

KJV-

John 7:8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.

ASV-

John 7:8 Go ye up unto the feast: I go not up unto this feast; because my time is not yet fulfilled.

Notice the ASV omits the first occurance of "yet". Does that make a difference? YES! Because two verses later Jesus went up to the feast. The ASV makes Jesus to appear to be a liar. An enemy of Christianity could say that Jesus was a liar and he could prove it with the Bible and then go to this verse. Other versions like the RSV also omit the word "yet" here without a footnote. Some versions omit the word but include a footnote.

But this is not the only difference between the KJV and MVs that affect doctrine, there are dozens of differences like this. So, this argument that the KJV and the MVs are all the inerrant word of God is false.

 

More arguing about words to no profit. Enemies of Christianity have taken the KJV and created false religions based upon it- the Mormons and the Jehovah's Witnesses are two. Stop playing the false dichotomy card.

 

:laugh::laugh: Sounds like you don't have an answer for that.


Seriously............all the different translations DO say different things. So saying they ALL are the Word of God is ridiculous to me.

 

They know they are different, it is obvious to any honest reader. But will they admit it? That remains to be seen.

 

Does Matthew 19:16-17 convey a different understanding between the KJV and NIV?

KJV-

Matt 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Here the rich ruler calls Jesus "Good Master" to which Jesus replies, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God".

Jesus is making a strong implication here that he is God himself. If he is truly good, and only one is good, that is God, then he is God.

But what does the NIV say here?

Matt 19:16 Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"
17 "Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."

The NIV says something absolutely different here, it points Jesus's response to the question "what good thing must I do to get eternal life?" whereas the KJV says "Why callest thou me good?"

So, the NIV gives a profound difference in understanding from the KJV in these verses. The KJV implies strongly that Jesus is God, the NIV does not, nor would one be led in that direction of thought from the NIV. The NIV also does not have any footnotes here to give the reader the alternate reading shown in the KJV.

It seems to me that the MVs like to shy away from verses that say Jesus is God.

 

The NIV seems to be promoting works. Instead of God's goodness being the primary focus, the focus is on man's goodness and what he can do to obtain eternal life.

 

Hi Winman, my list was given to prove that even the dreaded "Alexandrian" Bibles preach the resurrection of Christ from the dead. If you check John 1:1 in all the MV's (apart from the NWT) they all teach the deity of Christ as well.

Also, the proliferation of translations is actually a good thing (or so say the translators of the 1611AV):

HankD

 

Thank you Hank for the kind and civil response.

 

No problem Winman.

Language with logic and reason, known only to God, men and angels, a wonderful gift from above and we thank and glorify Him for this gift to His children.

James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.​

But since Babel He has confounded it because of our arrogance.

Language is delicate, fragile and translating from langauge to language is exceedingly difficult with nuances and subtle differences of words "falling through the cracks" going from one to another.

This is why the KJV translators said what they did concerning a "variety" of translations.

It's kind of like "triangulating".

We attempt to capture the exact nuance of a sentence and its words by looking at different attempts to translate a sentence to get as close an approximation as we can to the original language.

An example is ironically the shortest verse in the Scripture:

John 11:35 Jesus wept.​

The same English word is used of all the other mourners for Lazarus, they were "weeping".​

They were making loud vocal weeping, but the Greek word for "wept" in John 10:35 is different than the one used of the bystanders. ​

It means Jesus was "weeping" silently, the only indication being tears rolling down His cheeks. The words literally mean "Jesus made tears" and in the langauge of the day the nuance included silence.​

No translation can catch that very significant difference. Not the KJV or any other translation I have seen (maybe one) but it is impossible to miss in the original Koine.​

HankD​