But that's based on the assumption that the KJV is correct in the first place. Rather circular.
Whether it is thought-for-thought or word-for-word the translator is deciding for you.Vic said:
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
KJV
- Thread starter Oats
- Start date
Ashua
Member
LOL. How true!
Actually, someone showed me a current version of the New Testament called the "Sea Island Version" that is similar, but much worse than this!
Here's an example of the well known John 3:16:
I guess this is considered a dialect of English!
Lol, there is no way. That has to be a joke. Just proves my point if it is true. If we look at things in the eternal participle or context and not have a myopic vision of reality.... I know Olde English was not being spoken by the common people in 1611, but had those who spoke true Olde English seen how we speak today... Lol... I bet they'd have a similar response.
So, we cannot judge the use of Olde English in irreverency without knowing full well that modern English will be mocked in much the same way by a generation which is yet to be conceived.
Ashua
Member
Arguing to lexicons is fallacious. I believe D. A. Carson more or less covers this inhis Exegetical Fallacies.
Nope, it's true. Very new, but very true nontheless!
The Sea Island dialect is what is spoken by folks living on the Islands off the coast of the southestern United States. You can imagine, if that had been the only English you have ever heard, reading any other English translation of the Bible would be as difficult as it is for those of us speaking American or British English to understand the Sea Island English. That's why they developed this translation for them. I guess it was just recently finished. I assume there will be an Old Testament translation to follow eventually.
Ashua
Member
If it gets the job done, it gets the job done. That is more along the lines of a quasi-translation of it's own. We have many translations in standard English that virtually everyone in American can understand. The difference between that sea island translation and the kjv niv asv etc problem isn't understanding but misleading wording which warps, twists. adds to, diminishes from, or otherwise fails to express the intention of the original writer.
The problem is with the difficulty in translating. Different lexicons can give different meanings for the same word and even the same lexicon can give several different meanings for the same word. This is not "using the original language" and is no different than relying on multiple translations.
A big reason for multiple translations is the difficulty in translating and one is always at the mercy of the bias of the translators. I believe that without formal Greek training lexicons do little to nothing for understanding and certainly won't be useful for scrutinizing translations. If Greek scholars and translators have difficulty in agreeing on an interpretation of a given word or text, how can we think we will do better merely with a lexicon?
I don't know too much more about the Sea Island version than what I've already said, so I'm not defending or recommending it one way or the other. Just found it interesting in light of the original comment about future versions.
In fact, at our church board meetings, we always start by discussing a particular book of the Bible and reading passages that we felt applied to leadership. At our next one, just for fun (now that I've been reminded of this version), I think I'll read my passage from it just to watch their reactions.:D
Ashua
Member
It is true that what you say about complexity within lexicons with tenses and conjugations and so fourth.
That said, it is better than arbitrarily picking. It allows for you to at least weigh some sort of evidence. Just knowing the word allows you to go beyond strongs and research it through other means.
Given the option of simply picking a translation I like and sticking with it or looking at many translations in addition to the lexicon and cross referencing between them in addition to exegesis and context amplifies the odds of proper understanding above simply 'preferring' kjv or 'preferring' niv. It is an holistic approach. I don't cast my lot in with KJV exclusively. I just think it is a very solid translation and there isnt a reason to use another translation exclusively above it.
Ashua
Member
lol.
farouk
Member
The King James and New King James are a more formal and accurate translation.
Whereas the NIV, though on the surface more immediately 'readable', goes more into the 'dynamic' way of translating, sometimes at the expense of strict accuracy.
(I guess this is how I would explain it.)
I love the King James, BTW. (The NKJV is good, too.)
Whereas the NIV, though on the surface more immediately 'readable', goes more into the 'dynamic' way of translating, sometimes at the expense of strict accuracy.
(I guess this is how I would explain it.)
I love the King James, BTW. (The NKJV is good, too.)
Mike
Member
I really do have a problem with people who are KJV Only to the point that they're accusing the NIV of being a deception of the the Truth. The Word, being the Living Word is dynamic, in my opinion. If the Holy Spirit is leading the reader, he/she will be lead in Truth. I can understand there being a strong preference, but the NIV was not as arbitrarily conceived as some would believe. There was much research by the collective committee of scholars across many denominations. Suggesting the NIV is not inspired, reduces it to just another book. To say someone like myself has never read The Word because I've always used the NIV is over the top, IMO.
A
Alabaster
Guest
:amen The NIV closely adheres to the Greek.
farouk
Member
I'm certainly not KJV Only.
But it's not to be KJV Only to try to make an honest assessment about the level of accuracy of the KJV, in comparison with some other versions.
(Otherwise it just buys into the marketing ploys of the publishers of recent versions, if we can't try to make honest assessments.)
But it's not to be KJV Only to try to make an honest assessment about the level of accuracy of the KJV, in comparison with some other versions.
(Otherwise it just buys into the marketing ploys of the publishers of recent versions, if we can't try to make honest assessments.)
Mike
Member
farouk, I respect your opinion and those of people who come to the conclusion that the KJV is more accurate than other versions. If someone makes an honest assessment and comes to this determination, great! I'm speaking to the group that sees the KJV as the ONLY inspired version and other versions as heresy. Your point can be extrapolated, and we can say we need to be very cautious not to accept just ANY version simply because we feel it speaks to us. Some can be frivolously conceived. I have confidence in the roughly 100 theologians on the NIV committee that they were fully capable of collectively interpreting Scripture.
As I understand it, it comes down to two different methodologies. The KJV translates word-for-word very closely, and the NIV studies each word and thought and successfully uses vernacular that we are familiar with and makes sense to us in 2010 to understand what the writer/Holy Spirit is conveying. It is much more useful to me personally to use the second methodology, so I use the NIV. And I am very confident that when I read the NIV, I am reading the Inspired Message conveyed by the Holy Spirit.
jasoncran
Member
by that thinking so does the new world translation, they both used the westcort-hort.
i dont like fe types as i can simply explain to the lost if i tell them what the word says.
i read the kjv and grasped it easily. Not that all can do this with that version but I asked God to show me what the verses in question mean.
Do read or listen other translations , yes. sometimes we need to hear it put differently so that we do see that bias is there.
Vic C.
Member
Jason,
You just hit the proverbial nail on the head.
Their text was based in large part on the Codex Sinaiticus (and I also believe, the Codex Vaticanus). We know this group of text as the Alexandrian, or minority text. A good portion of this text was found was found in 1844 in the trash of St. Catherine's Monastery, which is located at the base of Mt. Sinai.
The Monks were getting ready to burn them. I assumed they believed them to be <cough> worthless.
For whatever reason ;), I lean toward translations based more on the Majority (or received text).
jasoncran
Member
i am not saying that the niv is bad just that it seems to miss key ideas.
try the niv in spanish and compare to others spanish versions i wonder what the differences would be.
i can see something already with kjv english to spanish niv.
hebrews 11:1 has this.
in spanish
ahora, bien la fe...
kjv english
now, faith..
what is good?
bien is good or better. in that context its good.
try the niv in spanish and compare to others spanish versions i wonder what the differences would be.
i can see something already with kjv english to spanish niv.
hebrews 11:1 has this.
in spanish
ahora, bien la fe...
kjv english
now, faith..
what is good?
bien is good or better. in that context its good.
turnorburn
Member
It stinks, before these newer versions the King James is what you got, if its good for a king its good enough for me. why now in the final generation we can't understand the KJV, If all we had was a Chinese version you would scream bloody murder. God reveals himself to a true seeker in His time.. these newer versions leave off the divinity of Christ.
It Stinks
turnorburn
It Stinks
turnorburn