Choice of modern Bible translations

[salt and light]

Soulwinner,

Hello!

[soulwinner]

#5 in the year 1851, Dr. Hort founded a society for the investigation and classification of ghosts and psychical phenomena in general. Westcott wrote in his Ghostly Circular: " The interest and importance of a serious and earnest inquiry into the nature of the phenomena which are vaguely called "supernatural" will scarcely be questioned. Many persons believe that all such apparently mysterious occurrences are due either to purely natural causes, or to delusions of the mind or senses, or to wilful deception. But there are many others who believe it possible that the beings of the unseen world may manifest themsevles to us in extraordinary ways, and also are unable otherwise to explain many facts the evidence for which cannot be impeached." #6 from Hort to Westcott that:"I can never look back on my Cambridge life with sufficient thankfulness. Above all, those hours which were spent over Plato and Aristotle have wrought that in me shich I pray may never be done away." Well that's enough alarms for me and thats the tip of the ice burg on those two so Bro. Purple thats one question down ill get back to some more Lord willing tonight

[soulwinner]

Hey salt and light good to see you brother how are you?

[salt and light]

Soulwinner,

I'm doing just fine praise Jesus, and how about you brother?

[soulwinner]

doing great thank you my wife and I celebrated our 4th year yesterday! Defending the old Book Amen!

[salt and light]

Soulwinner,

Congratulations, and keep at it brother, and tell your wife Salt and Light says hi.

[Purple Chris]

Hi soulwinner and salt and light,

soulwinner wrote...

you asked how so do the alarms go up over westcott and hort here is my basis it is not what others have accused them of it is what they have said themselves. Whenever in dealing with people no we cant take second hand accounts or accusations but we can take reputable proof and discern from there so it not what was said about them but what they said about themselves and here is a verse to go along with that.

Agreed...to a point.

What would you say to someone who wrote the following:

"I am carnal, sold under sin"

"I do not understand my own actions"

"Nothing good dwells within me"

"The evil I do not want is what I do"

"Wretched man that I am!"

"And I am the foremost of sinners"

"I am a Pharisee"

"I am a wrongdoer"

"I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians"

"I am not an apostle"

"I am a noisy gong"

"I am...unfit to be called an apostle"

"God I am"

"I am speaking as a fool"

"I am talking like a madman...become as I am"

"I am perplexed"

If you have not guessed, these are quotes from Paul, taken out of their context and if someone so chose, could be used to form a very poor opinion of Paul, not to mention other texts about him persecuting the church and things like that.

While things you have posted about Wescott and Hort may give reason for further investigation into who they were and what they believed, the small amount of what you posted, out of their contexts and without further resolution as to what they were saying is not adequate to form an educated opinion in the men. We must have a full picture in order to see clearly.

And what about other men who have translated the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts into English versions? Are they ALL "corrupt" also? What about men who translate the Bible into other languages? By your standards, those versions would be corrupt as well, even if translated from the KJ because of the changes that would no doubt be necessary to accomodate the language being translated into so that the Scriptures could be understood properly.

And I'll ask again...is there any evidence that the KJ translators made the claims of the KJ version that you are making? Where did this teaching first begin that the KJ is the only inerrant and inspired word of God? Who claimed that first? I hope you know because you are trusting that it is true so I hope you know who it is that you are trusting. Why are the manuscripts that the KJ is based on the ONLY trustworthy ones? What is the evidence outside of the KJ itself to suggest that?

and as far as Isaiah 14, I'll go by what my pastor showed me Wednesday night after bible study

So even clear evidence that there is no problem in any of the versions I listed does not matter? Can you or your pastor please tell me where my rendering is wrong? And I's respectfully ask that you not come back with "It's just corrupt" because that is not an argument, only a statement of opinion. Your Pastor's assertion that the wrong "star" was translated and "morning" was repeated twice makes all other versions corrupt is not a valid argument to make that statement as I showed.

I do feel that your idea of corruption is superficial as the texts you keep quoting do not lose their meaning because of how they are translated from the original languages. I do feel you have been taught this in error. But I do appreciate your zeal for the Lord and for truth. I'm leaving for a vacation, back in a week!

Blessings,

PC

Edited December 18, 2004 by Purple Chris

[salt and light]

Hello Purple Chris,

Well I guess their is no point of debating with you any longer, because after all the examples that I gave that should have proved to you that the NIV, NASB,RSV,NKJV and others are corrupt, you still insist otherwise. You said,

What would you say to someone who wrote the following:

"I am carnal, sold under sin"

"I do not understand my own actions"

"Nothing good dwells within me"

"The evil I do not want is what I do"

"Wretched man that I am!"

"And I am the foremost of sinners"

"I am a Pharisee"

"I am a wrongdoer"

"I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians"

"I am not an apostle"

"I am a noisy gong"

"I am...unfit to be called an apostle"

"God I am"

"I am speaking as a fool"

"I am talking like a madman...become as I am"

"I am perplexed"

I am familiar with what Paul had said, BUT, the Lord used Paul to write almost half of the new testament, Paul was a new creature in Christ, he had that born again experience on that road to Damascus, while I'm sure that Westcott and Hort did not. God didn't use someone who wasn't born again who didn't have a changed heart to write the new testament and to serve him. When Paul had said all those things, he was talking about his flesh, but he was walking in the Spirit. I can say the same thing Paul said, because there is no good thing in my flesh too, but through the Spirit, I keep my flesh under subjection. You can't compare Westcott and Hort to Paul, a man who hated christians and was on his way to kill some more until the Lord saved him and gave him a new heart. I do understand the point you were making though about the comments of Paul being taken out of context, but again, God used him, and God didn't use Wescott and Hort I believe, or the KJV translators would have used those manuscripts that Westcott and Hort used. There is one more example that I will give you that should tell you that the NIV, NASB,RSV etc. is corrupt, first of all, you said,

"I do feel that your idea of corruption is superficial as the texts you keep quoting do not lose their meaning because of how they are translated from the original languages. I do feel you have been taught this in error"

Well, tell me if this verse means the same in those corrupt versions as they do the KJV. The KJV says in Gal. 5:12, "I would they were even cut off which trouble you." The NIV has Paul saying, "I wish they would go the whole way and EMASCULATE themselves". The J.B. version says, "I would like to see the knife slip". The NASB says, "Would that those who are troubling you would even MUTILATE themselves" Your RSV you have been using for 23 years has the word 'mutilate' to. Now tell me if that verse in the KJV and those other versions mean the same. I tell you they do not. Clearly Paul wished "they", not one of their organs, were cut off. Wishing someone would do themselves bodily harm is not Christian teaching. In the NASB, in Acts 27:32, it says, 'Then the soldiers cut off the ropes of the boat, and let her fall in." Paul wasn't talking about cutting off body organs {mutilation} in Gal. 5:12, why didn't the NASB use the word "mutilate" in Acts 27:32 instead of "cut off"? mutilation wasn't being refered to in Gal. 5:12, so why wasn't "cut off" used in Gal. 5:12 but used in Acts 27:32 in the NASB? New version translators show their awareness of the true meaning by rendering this "cut" in Acts 27:32 not "mutilate the ropes'. I have many more examples, but I know I would be wasting my time convincing you that the NIV, NASB,RSV, and others are indeed corrupt.

[Guest PistosHuios]

Bleah, all these pages... I read the first and the last, so Idon't know if I'm repeating but... oh well. I'm a big fan of the ESV. I was brought up on the NIV, as a a kid, and my pastor always used the NASB to preach from and in the pews. So I gradually leaned toward that. I have a Scofield NIV, and Scofield KJV, but have spend the majority of my time in the NASB, and now even more time in the ESV.

The ESV is far and away my favorite translation. I used to take my NASB and jump from KJV, to NIV and then to Exaustive concordances. The ESV is the first translation that I've had that I trust to be close to all of them. I preach from it, I study from it.

I say give the ESV a chance, I was quite impressed. (I originally got it because my NASB was getting to "highlighted" so I wanted a fresh Bible) I got it, and I"ve never looked back. Well every once and a while, but not often.

Oh, I'm taking Greek right now as well, and I would suggest that to anyone. It may seem tedious but it's very interesting, and it gives me a confidence that I get from none of these translations.

Well that's all for now, hope this helps out.

[Purple Chris]

Hello salt and light,

Well I guess their is no point of debating with you any longer, because after all the examples that I gave that should have proved to you that the NIV, NASB,RSV,NKJV and others are corrupt, you still insist otherwise.

But there is much more to it than that and I thought that I was asking legitimate, rational questions that you felt were worthy of answering...why stop because we are not in agreement regarding differences in translation equallying corruption?

The reason I wrote those quotes of Paul was simply to show that one can take various quotes from someone and paint them however good or bad they want to. As you rightly pointed out, Paul was struggling with the flesh, so do you and I, as I'm confident Wescott and Hort did as well. The questions about how you have come to the conclusion that they were corrupt and immoral men based on a few quotes is not a convincing argument.

Regarding Gal. 5:12, the word Paul uses there is "apokopto" which means "to cut off, to cut away, amputate, mutilate" and is used in Mark 9:43, 45; John 18:10, 26 of cutting off a hand and an ear. In Galatians Paul is speaking aganist the one who is speaking against Paul and is preaching a "gospel" that puts people in bondage to legalism. And he uses harsh language hear that the Bible does use to speak of cutting off a body part, but of course here it is figurative, as he has just spoken about circumcision. Paul is not advocating the actual mutilation of a person and nor any version.

Do you have any thoughts on the other questions I've asked? Even going back to the question about "strain at" a gnat being an error?

Still willing,

PC