Why did we have Bible dictionaries, Bible commentaries, Bible handbooks, etc,.? No one can understand the Bible - 100%! Some did not understand the NIV or Nasb or KJV or whatsoever, and they used Bible tools for their reading/study.
What Version of the Bible do you read
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by ILoveTheLord, Mar 20, 2009.
?
-
King James Version (KJV)
30 vote(s)46.9% -
New King James Version (NKJV)
19 vote(s)29.7% -
New International Version (NIV)
15 vote(s)23.4% -
New Living Translation (NLT)
12 vote(s)18.8% -
Other
29 vote(s)45.3%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Page 8 of 10
-
-
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0310923077/?tag=baptis04-20
// The NIV translation is one easiest Bibles to understand at a grade reading level of 7.8 //
Footnote #3 here says:
http://www.glbaptistchurch.com/niv_quiz_glbc.html
// Flesch-Kincad Research Company. The NIV reading grade level was 8th. //
Here is an interesting place I got when I searched Google for:
"Flesch-Kincaid Research Company" -"King James Bible"
(i.e. there was no reference to the phrase 'King James Bible'
http://www.faithwriters.com/article-details.php?id=75094
Oh well, I have a copy of that book.
I cannot find this: http://flesch-kincaid.org/
or other indication that there is a Flesch-Kincaid research organization.
(other than the above mentioned KJVO places)
Gail Riplinger's "New Age Bible Versions" Chapter 11, page 195-217 does mention Flesch-Kincaid But gives no clue as to where, when, why -- nothing to help a person find out what she is talking about (if anything).
As far as I can determine (and I'll look at any evidence to the contrary):
Gail Riplinger made it up and 298 KJVO sites have quoted Gail.
Fun Facts: The misspelling "Flesch-Kincad" is quoted by 3 KJVO sources :)
Here is an interesting page on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch-Kincaid_Readability_Test
I'll look into those web sites. Recall that when I took graduate work I also used some Readability Test. I remember using a Sociology Graduate textbook - grade level was Grade 35 :) If Grade 14 is a Bachelor Degree and Grade 16 is a Master's degree, and Grade 24 is a Doctor's Degree -- then what is Grade 35? Tee Hee -
What ever happened to reading the translation of baby-baptizing, king James worshiping Anglicans?
-
Careful on the baptism thing and Anglicans. Queen Elizabeth I was immersed. If a person requests immersion, the vicar must provide for it. Most of the older Anglican Churches have a full baptistry under the floor.
Cheers,
Jim -
The "Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level" given on this page:
http://www.englishproofreading.ca/kincaid.htm
Is the same formula as given on page 196 of Gail Riplinger's NEW AGE BIBLE VERSIONS (God And Riplinger Publishing, 1993).
However, Gail also says:
-
I have done some reading on these men and they were highly respected and brilliant men. Do you also denigrate William Tynedale of whom most of KJV is directly copied from?
Why is ok to question the character of the KJV translators but it's not ok to question the character of MV translators? -
Why the need to denigrate the modern version translators? There's been a whole lot more of that in this thread?
-
Oh, yeah, I'm "blind" as well. See a few posts above.
Have you seen posts here telling me and others that I am not reading God's word? How would that make you feel? Talk about respect! There is none at all; in fact, it's worse than that. It's outright false accusation.
Anyway, the above is not denigrating anyone, it's making a point. While some may say the MVs are from idol worshipers (a false statement), he's making the point that the KJV was from Anglicans. The KJVOs here who denigrate scripture won't talk facts. -
-
I read whatever is available.
-
Not that your comment was even relevent here, but Jesus statement does not of itself "rule out" the LXX of anything. Again, the Tanakh (Torah-Neviim-Ketuviim) did not exist as a single volume in any language at the beginning of the 1st Century.
And finally, the same point I made before about the Lord's words recorded by Luke, the words recorded in Matthew are NOT Hebrew words ("jot" & "tittle" in English) but are preserved in the Greek terms "iota" & "keraia". -
The TRUE story
A preacher's brother who has awful difficult reading, read the KJV, but he can't read very well for many years. He studied the Bible and prepared a lesson for teaching in children's class. He had the ABILITY to read the Bible. He improved his reading later. No difficult! He still used the OLD KJV. I never forget this story because I WAS THERE. -
The words Jesus read, and proclaimed to be Scripture exactly correspond to no known Hebrew text. In addition, they do not match the LXX, either. So what exactly text was there at the synagogue? Jesus did pronounce it to be Scripture. I will presume He knew what He was talking about!
Ed -
BTW, I would be willing to invest and wager a couple of nickels that this reading was more likely from 18th Century KJV, a la the revision of Dr. Blaney, than from any early 17th Century KJV, a la the 1611 Gothic font or 1612 Roman font editions.
Ed -
Do you still believe Jesus read LXX?
See the followings:
1) Matthew 1:23 quoted from Isaiah 7:14
Greek NT/ KJV
Ιδου, ηπαρθενοςενγαστριεξεικαιτεξεταιυιον, καικαλεσουσιτοονομααυτουΕμμανουηλ
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel
LXX
Behold a virgin shall be with a child and bring forth a son, and Thou Shall call His Name Emmanuel
ιδουηπαρθενος
ενγαστριεξεικαιτεξεταιυιονκαικαλεσειςτοονομα
αυτουΕμμανουηλ
Masoretic Text ( Isaiah 7:14)
Thou (feminine You) shall call his name
Masoretic Text and LXX are the same, but NT is different from them.
2) Luke 4:19 quoted from Isaiah 61:1
Greek NT
Κηρυξαι (Preach)
LXX
Καλεσαι (call )
Masoretic Text
קרא
KRA ( Proclaim)
Greek NT is nearer to Masoretic Text than to LXX
3) Acts 8:32-33 quoted from Isaiah 53:7-8
Greek NT
Καιωςαμνοςεναντιοντουκειραντοςαυτοναφωνοςουτωςουκανοιγειτοστομα….. αυτου
LXX
Καιωςαμνοςεμπρσθεντουκειραντος (- )
αυτοναφωνοςουτωςουκανοιγειτοστομα (
Masoretic Text
He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearer
(quoted from Blueletterbible.com)
LXX used the synonym, but different word.
4) Hebrews 10:5 quoted from Psalm 40:6
Greek NT
Ευδοκησας
(delight in, pleasure)
LXX
Εζητησας
(seek, pursue)
Masoretic Text
Chaphatsta
(pleased to do, delight in)
Masoretic Text is nearer to Greek NT than LXX is
5) Matthew 2:6 – too much different, Hegemosin-Arxnota
6) Matthew 2:15
My son – His son
διοτινηπιοςΙσραηλκαιεγωηγαπησααυτονκαιεξΑιγυπτου
μετεκαλεσατατεκνααυτου
Greek NT : τον υιον μου.
7) Mt 2:18 – couldn’t be found in LXX
(maybe because Jeremiah of LXX is much shorter than MT as we find it in Dead Sea Scrolls)
φωνηενραμαηκουσθη, θρηνοςκαικλαυθμοςκαιοδυρμοςπολυς, ραχηλκλασουσατατεκνααυτης, καιουκηθελεπαρκληθηναι, οτιουκεισι
8) Mt 3:2 – Isaiah 40:3
A) Isaiah 40:3 LXX:
ΦωνηβοωντοςΤηερημωετοιμασαταικαιεσταιπανταΤασκολιαειςευθειανκαιητραχειαειςπεδια
B) NT in Greek ( Textus Receptus=Other Greek Texts, No variance)
Φωνη βοωντος εν τη ερημω ετοιμασατε την οδον Κυριου, ευθειας ποιετε τας τριβους αυτου
Too much different !
My file is not loaded here well, so some of the Hebrew letters are not shown above. -
24 And he said unto them,Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given. -
However, EdSutton (that's me) never said Jesus read from the LXX. In fact, I specifically said that the text Jesus read from in Lk. 4 did not correspond to either the LXX or any known Hebrew text. I also, from what little I've been able to find out, believe this corresponds exactly with no other known OT translation, as well.
So, "Exactly what unknown text of the synagogue, did Jesus read from and pronounce to be Scripture?" is still the unanswered question.
There seems to be no real doubt as to how the phrase "και ανεστη αναγνωναι" reads, or the meaning, from what I have seen via Thayer, Wigram, Bible Gateway, UBS-2, and MT (Hodges, et.al., - 2). In addition, with the scroll there for examination, I suggest if Jesus did not read from it (although Luke declares that He did), someone likely would have questioned it, unlike when Scripture is merely referenced.
Ed -
-
You are correct in general understanding about the quotations of OT in NT. I preume there might have been either Hebrew OT different from current Masoretic texts, or the disciples mentioned the meanings of the OT instead of Word-to-Word referenceas the Bible was not available to the individuals at that time.
Page 8 of 10