Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'translation'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Christian Discussions
    • Study Group
    • General Discussion
    • Bible Study
    • Theology
    • Apologetics
    • Prophecy
    • Do you want to just ask a question?
    • Christian Culture
    • Everything Else
  • Videos
    • General
    • News
    • Comedy
    • Biblical Topics
    • Christian Music
  • Current News
    • Most Interesting News Developments
    • Worthy Briefs
    • World News
    • Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
    • U.S. News
    • Christian News
    • Worthy Watch / Worthy Insights
  • Worthy Ministries
    • Worthy Devotions
    • What's the latest with the Worthy Ministries?
  • Who's on the Lord side?'s Topics
  • Cooking club's Smokers & related recipes/techniques
  • Cooking club's What's your favorite recipe?
  • Cooking club's Salads - not just lettuce!
  • Cooking club's Soups and Stews
  • Cooking club's About Multi-cookers - features, tips, recipes
  • Cooking club's Taters!
  • Cooking club's Bread
  • Gardening.'s Gardening Club Forum
  • Photography How To (tips and tricks)'s Photography Club Topics
  • Maker's Club's Club News
  • Maker's Club's So, what do you make, what have you made?
  • Maker's Club's Physical Art, specifically!
  • Maker's Club's Life hacks & tips - useful things you know & have tried!
  • Bible 365's Misc. Things of interest
  • Bible 365's THE DAILY READING (see reading schedule)
  • Bible 365's Todays' Reading
  • Bible 365's Recently added or updated
  • Bible 365's Bible Trivia
  • Bible 365's Table of Contents
  • Bible 365's Tightly Moderated Discussions-Some Controversial
  • Bible 365's Specific Doctrines
  • Bible 365's WorthyChat Bible Studies
  • Bible 365's Bible Topics - Looking at the Bible Topically
  • Reading Club's Topics
  • Bible Trivia's Index to Bible Trivia and Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Answers
  • Bible Trivia's Bible Trivia Quizzes
  • Bible Trivia's Announcements
  • Puzzle Club's Forums
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Resources
  • The Prophecy Exchange's Forums
  • Songs of Praise Poetry Club's Forums
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Lessons
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Testimonies
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's 12 Steps and Biblical Comparison
  • Christ Centered Recovery Group's Forums
  • Diabetes and Low Carb Eating Support Group's Diabetes
  • Diabetes and Low Carb Eating Support Group's Low Carb Eating
  • Triumph Over Cancer's General topics
  • Triumph Over Cancer's Encouragement
  • Triumph Over Cancer's Tips and advice
  • Cat Chat's Information concerning cats and their servants
  • Cat Chat's Misc. unCATegorized cat things
  • Cat Chat's Our Feline Babies!
  • Gardening Club's Topics
  • Baking club's Miscellaneous
  • Baking club's sponge cakes
  • Bible - Daily Reading's Introduction
  • Bible - Daily Reading's 2023 Bible Reading Schedule
  • Deeper Discourse's Forum

Christian Blogs

  • traveller - Standing in the Wind
  • The Treasure In The Field
  • For the Love of God
  • Keys to the Kingdom
  • To Him be the Glory
  • Marathoner's Blog
  • Leonardo’s Blog
  • Word Studies Relating to Destiny
  • Searching the Scriptures.
  • Thought and Reflection
  • WilliamL's Worthy Insights
  • Marilyn's Messages
  • Bible Study Series
  • Albert Finch Ministry
  • Devotions
  • League of Savage Gentlemen.
  • ~~Angels Thoughts~~
  • A Desert Sage ?
  • Omegaman's Thought and Rants
  • Some Thoughts from AyinJade
  • Insights into Worthy Ministries
  • Bible 365's Reading Schedule - Click Read More to see
  • Bible 365's Basic Instructions
  • Bible Trivia's Guidelines
  • Songs of Praise Poetry Club's My Songs to the Lord

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Location


Interests

Found 7 results

  1. Here are some important differences between Bibles based on the Majority Text, on the one hand, and the Critical Text, on the other hand. Mark 16:9-20 This whole passage is marked as being spurious, in many CT-based translations. It is present in almost all Greek manuscripts that contain the ending of Mark (with slight variations). The two main manuscripts that omit it (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) have clear indications of having been tampered with, at this point. One of them has a space where the passage should be (the only such space in the entire manuscript) and the other enlarges the font size here, to mask the fact that verses are missing (again the only such place in the whole manuscript where this is done). Why would anyone in his right mind mark this as spurious, on the basis of no reliable evidence whatever? 1 Tim. 3:16 (WPNT) Yes, the mystery of our religion is confessedly great: God was manifested in flesh, was vindicated in spirit, was revealed to angels, was proclaimed among nations, was believed in the world, was received up in glory! Here is textual criticism expert (and Majority Text advocate) Dr. Wilbur Pickering's comment on "God was manifested in flesh...". "Instead of ‘God’, 1% of the Greek manuscripts read ‘who’, and most modern versions follow this 1%. But ‘who’ is nonsensical (in the context), so most of them take evasive action: NEB and NASB have “he who”; Phillips has “the one”; NRSV, Jerusalem, TEV and NIV render “he”. Berkley actually has “who”! In the Greek Text the relative pronoun has no antecedent, so it is a grammatical ‘impossibility’, besides being a stupidity—what is so mysterious about someone being manifested in flesh? All human beings have bodies. The pronoun can be accounted for as an easy transcriptional error, a simple copying mistake, so why not stay with the 98.5%? “God was manifested in flesh”—now there you have a mystery!" John 7:8 (WPNT) You guys go up to this feast; I’m not going up yet to this feast, because my time has not yet fully come.” Here is Pickering's comment (in his NT translation - "The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken") on the missing "yet", in most CT translations. "Perhaps 1% of the Greek manuscripts, of inferior quality, omit “yet” (as in NASB, TEV, RSV, etc.). The reading of the so-called ‘critical’ text has the effect of ascribing a falsehood to Jesus, since He did in fact go to the feast (and doubtless knew what He was going to do). Among the 99% are P66,75 and B—since the UBS editors usually attach the highest value to P75 and B, isn’t it strange that they reject them in this case?" Matt. 5:22 (WEB) But I tell you, that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whoever shall say to his brother, ‘Raca !’ shall be in danger of the council; and whoever shall say, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna. Here is what Pickering says about the omission of "without a cause", in the CT. "God hates injustice and will judge it. Less than 2% of the Greek manuscripts, of inferior quality, omit “without cause” (as in NIV, NASB, LB, TEV, etc.). NIV, NASB and LB favor us with a footnote informing us that “some manuscripts” add ‘without cause’—by “some” they mean 98% of them!! More serious, the shorter text has the effect of forbidding anger, which would contradict other Scriptures (Ephesians 4:26, Psalm 4:4) and the Lord’s own example (Mark 3:5)." John 3:13 (VW) No one has ascended to Heaven but He who came down from Heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in Heaven. This is one of the main verses proving that the Lord Jesus was omnipresent, during his earthly ministry (thus refuting the "Kenosis" heresy that Jesus emptied himself of some of his attributes as God). Here is part of what Jay P. Green (textual critic, TR supporter, author of the KJ3 Bible translation and a Hebrew and Greek to English Interlinear) says about the omission of "who is in Heaven", by most of the CT translations. "Evidence for the omission: MANUSCRIPTS: P66, P75, Aleph, B, L, T and 33 = 2 papyri, 4 uncials, 1 cursive (the first 4 executed in Egypt, at a time when the Gnostics dominated that nation; the latter 3 are late manuscripts, executed by those, who, like our modern critics, venerated Aleph and B). Versions: none FATHERS: 7 Evidence the words are divine: MANUSCRIPTS: More than 1,800 and that many more lectionaries = at least 99.5% of all manuscripts. VERSIONS: 10 FATHERS: 38" [The Gnostics, The New Versions, and The Deity of Christ, by Jay P. Green, Sr., 1994, p23] --------------------------------- There is much more, but this should be enough to show that something disturbing is going on here. God's providence gave the Church the Received Text, at a time of great God-given return to the Lord and the Bible (The Reformation, imperfect as it was). This went through several editions, but they were all very similar to each other. The Reformers only had a relatively small number of manuscripts to work with, but those have since been found to be highly representative of the majority discovered since then. The rest of this post is taken from a post I made, in another thread, earlier today. It's mainly a matter of faith in God's character and providence. The Reformation was a time of great, God-given, return to God and his word. It was at this time that the TR was collated and accepted, by the people of God, in many countries; and sound translations were produced in English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, etc.. Zoom forwards to the 1800s and we find the first determined opposition to the TR (amongst Protestants - the RCs had always opposed it vehemently), in the form of Westcott, Hort and a few others. This was a time of great departure from faith in God and his word, with a worship of man's reason replacing it. Westcott and Hort desperately wanted to replace the TR with a new Greek NT, based on their own ideas. Hort hated the TR, calling it "vile" and "villainous" (before he'd even studied the subject, by his own admission) and laboured for decades to create a replacement. Decades later, he had been made the head of the translation committee for the Revised Version (an officially sanctioned revision of the KJV, whose remit was to revise the English (and that as little as possible), NOT the underlying Greek and Hebrew). Hort secretly, and contrary to his mandate, introduced his own Greek NT, to replace the TR, and persuaded the other committee members to go along with it. Most modern Bibles are based on Greek NTs that are similar to Hort's version and they have serious changes and omissions, in very important places. There is much more to it than this; but the point is that the TR is based on trust in God and his providence; whereas, the replacement Greek NT is based on trust in some very dubious people and their very dubious suppositions.
  2. Jeremiah 24:2 One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad. Say what? The Lord showed Jeremiah two baskets of figs set before the temple, and used them metaphorically to explain what His plans were for two different sorts of people. It's a great little OT passage, but very naughty figs...? I expect it was normal vocabulary for the KJV translators, but hilarious nowdays. Who's got another one...
  3. A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON: - Hebrews 4:12 (KJV) - Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV) Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times. - Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV) Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ" - 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV) Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV). Here is our History: The Authorized Version: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church; Later revised as the King James Version Bible. The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset. The one and only true word of God (in the English Language). The Holy Bible. - Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV) Pre 1611 (Old Testament): Was known to be in the Hebrew Language. Pre 1611 (New Testament): Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language. ............................................................................................. Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion): These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith.
  4. As I write this, we have been reading the Book of Luke. I thought it might interest some of you, to see what it was like, if you were a protestant of means, able to afford one of those new fangled things called a printed Bible. Some people refer the the King James Bible, as the authorized version. It was an authorized version, authorized by the King, and the translation was completed in 1611. This authorization was for the Church of England. While the Church of England was not Roman Catholic, neither was it properly protestant church. The King James Version, was commissioned, in part, to counteract the Bible popular with protestants, to help make it easier to maintain the religious hierarchy of the Church of England. The protestants were too critical of the Church of England for the Kinds tastes, so a new version was commissioned for use in the churches of the Church of England. Basically, the Church of England, was protesting the protestants. While the KJV is an "authorized version" it was the third authorize version. Prior to it, was the Bishops Bible, of 1568, and before that, was the Great Bible, of 1535. The King James version, as was said, is AN authorized version. It was not given the title of "The Authorized Version", until 1814. Lest you get the impression, that I am anti King James Version, I am not. I love the King James Version, and it has been EXTREMELY important in church history. It is a good version. There was a faction of the Church of England, known as the Puritans. They were not called the Puritans, because they were so pure and holy, though that is how many have come to think of that term. The Puritans, were about purging or purefying the church, not just of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but also from issues of having a church, run by a monarch. The Puritans believed that the Church of England, was still too "Catholic" in it's operation. The puritans believed in the priesthood of all believers, not an appointed caste of Popes and Bishops and the like. This did not earn them the admiration of Kings and Popes, so they were persecuted and exiled. They were protestants, in most senses of the word. The Bible of choice, among the Puritans, was the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible, was the first Bible to have chapter and verse numbers, and it was translated in 1560. It was carried on the Mayflower to America, and it was the most popular English Bible, during the period of the Protestant Reformation. Why this abbreviated history lesson on early English Bible versions? I wanted you to see how easy you have it. Bibles were not often in the hands of common people. The belief of the reformers, that the Bible should be available to all, and the invention of the printing press, was the beginning of the process that lead to mass Bible access. If you were a well off Protestant, over 400 years ago, what would you have seen? Here is page of a Bible (the Geneva Bible), that was printed in English, before the King James Version.
  5. What leading Greek scholars say about the NWT: Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls the NWT "a frightful mistranslation," "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature) Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest." British scholar H.H. Rowley stated, "From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not be translated." "Well, as a backdrop, I was disturbed because they (Watchtower) had misquoted me in support of their translation." (These words were excerpted from the tape, "Martin and Julius Mantey on The New World Translation", Mantey is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Kingdom interlinear Translation) Dr. Julius Mantey , author of A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the NWT "a shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'" "I have never read any New Testament so badly translated as The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of The Greek Scriptures.... it is a distortion of the New Testament. The translators used what J.B. Rotherham had translated in 1893, in modern speech, and changed the readings in scores of passages to state what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and teach. That is a distortion not a translation." (Julius Mantey , Depth Exploration in The New Testament (N.Y.: Vantage Pres, 1980), pp.136-137) the translators of the NWT are "diabolical deceivers." (Julius Mantey in discussion with Walter Martin) Dr. William Barclay, a leading Greek scholar, said "it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest." Google Bruce Metzer, Marcus Borg, N.T. Wright, Elaine Pagels, Dominic Crossan-they all believe the NWT is a travesty. It is very bad. These people studied Koine Greek and the social/political world for decades.
  6. 1846 Oct. 25th - Westcott: "Is there not that in the principles of the "Evangelical" school which must lead to the exaltation of the individual minister, and does not that help to prove their unsoundness? If preaching is the chief means of grace, it must emanate not from the church, but from the preacher, and besides placing him in a false position, it places him in a fearfully dangerous one." (Life, Vol.I, pp.44,45). Dec. 23rd - Westcott: "My faith is still wavering. I cannot determine how much we must believe; how much, in fact, is necessarily required of a member of the Church." (Life, Vol.I, p.46). 1848 July 6th - Hort: "One of the things, I think, which shows the falsity of the Evangelical notion of this subject (baptism), is that it is so trim and precise...no deep spiritual truths of the Reason are thus logically harmonious and systematic...the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical...the fanaticism of the bibliolaters, among whom reading so many 'chapters' seems exactly to correspond to the Romish superstition of telling so many dozen beads on a rosary...still we dare not forsake the Sacraments, or God will forsake us...I am inclined to think that no such state as 'Eden' (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam's fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants" (Life, Vol.I, pp.76-78). July 31st - Hort: "I spoke of the gloomy prospect, should the Evangelicals carry on their present victory so as to alter the Services." (Life, Vol.I, p.160). Oct. 15th - Hort: "I entirely agree - correcting one word - with what you there say on the Atonement, having for many years believed that "the absolute union of the Christian (or rather, of man) with Christ Himself" is the spiritual truth of which the popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit...Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ's bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy." (Life, Vol.I, p.430). Oct. 17th - Hort: "I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and 'Jesus'-worship have very much in common in their causes and their results." (Life, Vol.II, p.50). 1890 Mar. 4th - Westcott: "No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history - I could never understand how any one reading them with open eyes could think they did - yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere."
  7. A great study showing how dangerous the NIV Bible really is. Please READ this before commenting. Reproduced with permission. serious omissions in the niv.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...