Last edited by a moderator:
-
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!
Some Singular Readings In The NIV...
- Thread starter Rippon
- Start date
"In its time" needs to be defined. It wasn't considered eloquent, elegant or beautiful in the 17th century. It didn't hit its stride until around 1750 or so. That's when its praises were sung.
"Moreover in 1611 translators followed the syntax of classical Greek; but now we know that the Greek of the New Testament corresponds syntactically to Hellenistic Greek. This makes a tremendous difference in, for example, the connecting phrases of the Johannine epistles." (p.95)
"In the first century, books written for the literati were still written in Attic Greek. Is there something to be learned from the fact that the New Testament documents were written by men who, moved by the Holy Spirit, chose rather the colloquial Hellenistic Greek?" (p.98)
The King James Only Debate :A Plea for Realism by D.A. Carson
"In the first century, books written for the literati were still written in Attic Greek. Is there something to be learned from the fact that the New Testament documents were written by men who, moved by the Holy Spirit, chose rather the colloquial Hellenistic Greek?" (p.98)
The King James Only Debate :A Plea for Realism by D.A. Carson
Last edited:
It is impossible to approach Koine Greek without realising that it differs (not hugely, but somewhat) from Classical Greek. The translators of the KJV must have been well aware of that. You have only to read both in the original to understand that they are not the same.
If you believe I have said something sinful, report it. Otherwise, stop bleating. Even better, put me on ignore if my posts are so offensive to you.
No, if you had read and not merely quoted Carson he was saying that the KJV team did not know --they were not aware.
I am not a hypocrite. I don't put people on 'ignore' only to be able to read their comments when someone else quotes them. It is laughable to put someone on ignore.
I fully intend to speak out when you and others cross the line.
Last edited by a moderator:
I did read it. I think he's wrong.
To clarify, there were certain things that the KJV translators could not have known. They were unaware, for example, of the Granville Sharp rule, because it was not propounded until the end of the 18th Century. This accounts for the faulty KJV renderings of Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1.
But to say that they were unaware of the differences between Classical and Koine Greek is to represent them as mindless boobies, which they were most certainly not. You cannot read the Greek NT without being aware of them.
Bump. Or have you selectively put this question on 'ignore'?
If you are referring to his use of "muck", he reported himself. The Admin team ruled in the context he properly used the word. As in "Jack, go muck out the stables." Or the pigs wallowed in the muck and mire. It's not used as much in Amer-English. But it is used in BritEnglish.
They were the best scholars in the Hebrew/Greek of their time, so no fault of their own, as they were not privy to the Sharp rule, nor to the older manuscripts, but were indeed clear on distinction between Biblical and classical Greek!
To refresh the minds of those who have refused to acknowledge the obvious.
I know exactly what it means. It's a euphemism for the F-word and it means ：to play around, fiddle around, fool around and mess around.
MM said :"So just how much are we entitled to muck about with the God-breathed text?
He has used that terminology with respect to the translators and hence the translation of the NIV repeatedly over the years. It is reprehensible.
No, it is not at least in British English. Martin is a Devonshireman. So, he uses British English. I also know the man personally. As noted above, the Admin team has decided he is using the word correctly in his native dialect of English. What about him would give you a reason to think otherwise?
I have worked with Brits for almost twenty years including the present.
The word muck means to play around, fool around, mess around, fiddle around -- as I clearly said in my past post.
It is disgraceful for him to use that term or any of the above to describe what the translators of the NIV did.
Put the shoe on the other foot:
How would you take it if I would have said that the NKJV translators were just mucking about when they did their work.
It would be an acceptable thing for me to say that the NKJV is based on an inferior text and uses strained English. But to say the above is stepping out of line just as MM has done repeatedly over the years with respect to the NIV.
McGrath contradicts himself, and fails to produce any evidence to back up his claims.
First of all, having studied classical Greek at University, and then having studied Koine Greek when I was saved, I can say that the differences between Classical and Kione are not huge but they are clear. To say that the KJV translators would not have been aware of the differences to just plain wrong.
Next, he says,
'The language of the workplace and the market is thus subtly changed into the high cadences of the places of Westminster....etc.'
Yet on Page 254, he says,
'Yet there is no evidence that the translators of the KJV had any great interest in matters of literature or linguistic development. Their concern was primarily to provide an accurate translation of the Bible.. Paradoxically, the king's translators achieved literary distinction precisely because they were not deliberately pursuing it..........The central objective of the king's translators was scholarly accuracy-- the finding of proper English words and phrases to render the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic.'
Next, McGrath gives no examples of the 'high cadences' etc. of which he accuses the KJV translators. However, in the paragraph immediately before that quoted by Rippon (Page 238), he writes,
'An example may help illuminate the point being made. In classical Greek, the word apantesis bears the general meaning of 'meeting.' The King james translators used this translation without any particular hesitations, as it made sense in every case-- for example as in Luke's account of the Roman Christians coming out to meet Paul as he travelled along the Appian Way (Acts 28:15).
'And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as the Appii Forum, and the three taverns:
Although this translation is not misleading, it fails to appreciate the developed use of the word apantesis at the time. The word now bore the sense of "an official welcome for a distinguished visitor who has just arrived"............Luke's narrative , therefore, indicates that the Roman Christians travelled to meet Paul along the Appian Way in order to give him the kind of distinguished welcome reserved for persons of great importance-- a point that the King James Bible fails to bring out.'
It is quite correct that since the production of the KJV, hundreds of Greek manuscripts, both classical and koine, have been discovered and in some cases this has led to a better understanding of the meaning of individual words. However, let's look at Acts 28:15 in various translations and see what improvements have been wrought by the new understanding of apantesis. We are looking specifically at the word 'meet.'
KJV: 'And from thence, when the brethren heard of us, they came to meet us as far as the Appii Forum, and the three taverns.'
NKJV. 'And from there, when the brethren heard about us, they came to meet us as far as Appii Forum and Three Inns.'
ESV. 'And the brothers there, when they heard about us, came as far as the Forum of Appius and Three Taverns to meet us.'
NIV (1984). 'The brothers there had heard that we were coming, and they travelled as far as the Forum of Appius and the Three Taverns to meet us.'
NASB. 'And the brethren, when they heard about us, came as far as the Market of Appius and Three Inns to meet us.'
Isn't it strange that none of these modern translators have made use of this 'new developed use of the word apantesis'?
Last edited:
Just to be absolutely clear, that is exactly what I meant by my use of the words 'muck about' and I stand by it. There are no sexual connotations in the words as per Rippon. That is a product of his fevered imagination.
Bump again.
You stand with your sin then.
I never said nor suggested such.
You are pretending not to understand plain English.
My temperature is perfectly fine, but your IQ seems to be at room temperature.