I agree and I'm a Tyndale's translation reader, too! (That's what you meant, isn't it?)
Why The Need?
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Baptist4life, Jan 28, 2009.
Page 5 of 6
-
-
2. No, I certainly don't give you axcessive atention or reverence.
3. NO WAY!
4. No, I don't have an obsessive preoccupation or attachment for you.
When God's word is attacked by those who hold the errant "one version" or KJVO position, I defend the word against such attacks. I have always defended God's word against KJVO attacks, and I have no intention of stopping now. -
Between the publication of the KJV in 1611 and the ASV in 1901, there were no less than 522 attempts by translators, revisors, or editors to discover the exact meaning of the original text of the Bible and express it pricisely in current English. I believe that adds up to 800 English translations in one form or another before 1901 (with none included from the most recent 108 years). How many of those caused harm? I don't think the facts of history support your opinion. -
I think the problem is more attitude about versions than how many versions we have available.
I benefit from all that I have read.
Cheers,
Jim -
-
Baptist4life Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
If anything, the written word in many translations enhances our Bible Study.. a lot of times, I just project e-sword onto the wall, and dive in. If there is a question about a verse, I click on "compare" and all of my 39 versions of that verse is on the wall.. we read through them and get a real sense of what God was fully saying. I have everything from NASB and ESV on the most literal Word for Word end to The Message on the loose paraphrase end.
Try it sometime...
Hello there (tiny doing a Billy Mays impersonation)
TinyTim here... And I want to share with you something that revolutionized the way I did Bible Study...
e-sword!
www.e-sword.net
e-sword is a computer program that has many versions of the Bible, many commentaries, and dictionaries... plus many extras...
Now, what would you expect to pay for all of these valuable resources...
$500?,
$299.50?
$99?
Well for an unlimited time, get this, you don't have to pay!!!
That's right, it is .....
KABOOOM FREE!
But you have to click now..
And by doing so, you not only get one KJV.. you get the KJV 1611 FREE!
That's right, FREE. along with many commentaries, dictionaries, and extras... like 2000 sermon illustrations...
What could be better?... OH yeah, THEY ARE FREE!!!
Now back to our program ! -
-
Baptist4life Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
I guess I should have been more clear. The confusion comes from different versions translated from different texts ie: NIV or HCSB compared to NKJV or KJV, Missing verses, etc.
This most often leads to a "why does YOUR Bible have those verses and mine doesn't?" discussion. Which leads to a "doubting" of whether their particular version is "right" or is your version "right" to either add or leave out those verses. "They either should be in there" Or "they shouldn't be in there".................. either way breeds DOUBT about the Bible and "can we trust it."
No, our church is NOT mostly new Christians, but our Bible studies are open to people from all over the area, not just our members, and I would guess that maybe 50% are from different churches, using about every version you can think of.
Example, during Christmas various readings from Luke 2 were given. One version said Joseph was espoused to Mary, one said betrothed, one engaged, one pledged, I believe....anyway......one version, I don't remember which stated it this way............." Joseph was engaged to Mary, who was pregnant"............
It was brought up that this made it look like Joseph and Mary had had sexual relations and Joseph was the father of the baby. This led to a discussion, and more confusion, about different translations. All in all, the Bible study gets side tracked by questions about which versions are correct and which ones ADD or LEAVE OUT things.
That was probably confusing, but a small idea of what happens when you have 15-20 people at the same table reading from 10 different versions. -
-
This is where the leader comes in and should explain the differences...Confusion should be displaced.
Cheers,
Jim -
-
Baptist4life Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
This thread is up to 10 pages, and we're getting nowhere FAST! :tongue3: I guess we'll just "agree to disagree". I still feel that TOO MANY versions are out there and not needed. We have some mainstream versions, the NIV, NKJV, KJV, NASB, and I think those are ENOUGH in the English language. Any more only causes, IMHO, confusion and doubt. As I stated before, new versions ARE necessary but they should be in another language so non English speaking people can have God's Word in their own language.
-
-
B4L... a confusion arose in our association one time because of ignorance to the way the word has been translated.. . Some churches wanted to make other churches KJVO..
So the leadership of the association offered a "history of the Bible" class in which the instructor was well versed in the way the Bible has been handed down to us. He started at the beginning, explained the process of translation... etc.
In the end.. NO KJVO showed up to the class.. they didn't want to "study to show themselves approved"... they took the easy way out... Willing Ignorance.
IF you congregation is ignorant to the fact of how versions are made, and it sounds like they are since they are questioning that verses are missing... (BTW... look at the bottom of the page.. it is there.. just honest), then it may be tiime for an education on how the Bible is translated.
Educating people is hard.. it will not be easy.. it is much easier to take the one version only route..
But that is not historical truth...
And you don't want to be accused of lying to your brothers and sisters when you stand before God just because it was the easy way out...
Encourage learning.. and when you do, the confusion will go!
God is not the author of confusion.. people who are willingly ignorant are. -
Baptist4life Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
-
Rather than the four you have identified, why not Matthew's, Coverdales's, Great, and Geneva (chronologically some of the earliest complete English Bibles translated mostly from the original languages)? What would be the objective criteria?
Page 5 of 6