The Fathers Of Modern perVersions

[Justin Adams]

And then we have the Aramaic translation into Greek, then translated again. Josephus is adamant that the commercial language and the one most in use in the time of Yeshua and the early apostles (with the possible exception of Saul) was Aramaic. Certain verses have maybe been mistranslated... I.e. My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me, might read, my God, My God, why hast thou spared me..  
Where Matthew 27:46 in Greek is transliterated "Eli, Eli lama sabachthani", the Peshitta (Aramaic) reads: Eli, Eli lama azbatani - "My God! My God! Why have you spared me?"

[OldCoot]

I have generally held that many of the NT books were originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic.  There are nuances in the Greek text that suggest that.   However, we do not have much in the way of original Aramaic or Hebrew texts of the NT to come to any real conclusions on how passages should be translated.  The plethora of textual evidence for the NT is in Greek.  Until someone finds equivalent "dead sea scrolls" discovery of the NT in original Hebrew/Aramaic and conclusively documented from the 1st century, we are somewhat stuck with what we have.  

And while there could be remote variances in a Hebrew/Aramaic original from the Greek we have, the main principles of the faith probably will not be at risk.  Just it would add some clarity to some passages.

[Marilyn C]

On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 7:22 AM, OldCoot said:

I have generally held that many of the NT books were originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic.  There are nuances in the Greek text that suggest that.   However, we do not have much in the way of original Aramaic or Hebrew texts of the NT to come to any real conclusions on how passages should be translated.  The plethora of textual evidence for the NT is in Greek.  Until someone finds equivalent "dead sea scrolls" discovery of the NT in original Hebrew/Aramaic and conclusively documented from the 1st century, we are somewhat stuck with what we have.  

And while there could be remote variances in a Hebrew/Aramaic original from the Greek we have, the main principles of the faith probably will not be at risk.  Just it would add some clarity to some passages.

Hi OldCoot,

Thanks for taking off that goofy looking picture. It made me cross eyed.

Marilyn.

[Marilyn C]

On ‎28‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 5:05 AM, OakWood said:

While we're on the subject, be wary of the Doeuy-Rheims Bible.

Here is the KJV version of Genesis 3:15

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

and here is the Douey-Reheims version of the same verse

I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Notice the change of the wording 'it shall bruise thy head' becomes 'she shall crush thy head'.  - this verse is referring to the seed of the woman (Jesus Christ), but the Douey version has changed the word to 'she' to declare that is the woman who destroys the serpent, not the man. The Doey-Rheims Bible is often known as the Jesuit Bible and the tampering of this verse is a Jesuit attempt to encourage the worship of Mary.

Hi Oakwood,

Also a lot of Bibles have the word `she` in Eph. 5: 25 & 26, in reference to the Body of Christ, when in actual fact the word is `it.` Meaning His body, and not a female.

And again many Bibles have `saints` instead of `holy ones,` (which can be saints or angels) in Jude 14, Zech. 14: 5. (thus more scriptures are needed)

Both these errors have led to people believing that the Body of Christ is female and comes back to earth. Very different from the truth - the Body of Christ is Christ`s body, He is the head, and it will rule & reign in the third heaven with Him, over all.

regards, Marilyn.

[Guest Wanda01]

On 9/24/2017 at 2:51 PM, Teditis said:

KJ-Only people are just a manifestation of Satan to separate the Brethren.

That is a vile broad accusation.

My family and I are KJV only. But at NO TIME have any of us ever pounded our chests and exclaimed how holy we are, for reading the one translation. Nor have we ever pointed an accusatory finger at another, because they choose a different translation. Like you have done here, for instance.

Slanderous accusations...a lack of real Scriptural love....THOSE things separate the brethren.

[other one]

On ‎9‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 2:51 PM, Teditis said:

KJ-Only people are just a manifestation of Satan to separate the Brethren.

 

On ‎9‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 3:06 PM, other one said:

Pondering on that....

 

we've got KJ only people here and I have never attached any of their views to Satan.   I've pondered on this for a while and that just doesn't make sense to me

[OldCoot]

It does seem rather goofy to suggest that someone preferring a particular translation is somehow divisive or evil. While I don't regularly use the KJV much anymore, I still like it.  Like all translations, it does a particularly good job on some passages and falls on it's face in some passages.  But it is overall a solid translation.  I can't really say that any translation is "the best".  They all have good points and bad points.  I find, irregardless of translation, I have to do background word studies to get at the real meat of some passages.

About the only translations that one can make some sort of claims about "evil" would be those out of bounds translations like the one from the Jw's Watchtower.  That would definitely fall in the "corrupt" category.

Edited October 3, 2017 by OldCoot

[Omegaman 3.0]

How many threads do you need to stir up strife on the same topic Kiwi? Consider diversifying a little. 

[Guest Teditis]

10 hours ago, other one said:

 

we've got KJ only people here and I have never attached any of their views to Satan.   I've pondered on this for a while and that just doesn't make sense to me

I think that Satan is very subtle sometimes and use small tactics to destroy.

KJ-Onlyists tend to look down on other Christians because they look down on the versions of their Bibles... thereby implying

that others don't have a fuller understanding of God, as they do. This causes division amongst Believers and that's something

that Satan revels in. The Pride that KJV onlyists show is self-apparent and pride is not from God, right?

On top of all that.. the mere notion that the KJV is without error is erroneous in itself... it's not "truth". And I think that Satan is

the Father of Lies... ergo, the KJ-onlyists are following lies and even preaching lies to others... confusing many. What of all the

non-English speaking brethren in the world? Are they to be without the whole Truth of God's Word, simply because they speak and

read other languages? Of course not... other Versions have been shown to be as accurate if not more accurate to the earliest writings

and God has made His Word known in many tongues. Why would anyone dispute this as vociferously as a KJ-onlyist would? I think

that's it's because they're deceived by Satan's lies.

[other one]

maybe I am wrong but the KJ only people that I know are concerned with the manuscripts that the newer versions are translated from...   The Alexanderian influence that is injected into the Nestle is a little disturbing to me also.

Fact is in my opinion none of the English versions are totally true to the original for you have to go to paraphrase versions to really convey some of the meanings of the Greek words for they just don't translate......     too many words translated Hell, and even more Love.

but almost any of the translations can get you saved if you look at the whole book.   I personally don't know anyone who thinks I will go to hell because I don't read the KJ all the time.     My personal favorites is the missionary......   tell me about Jesus, fill me with the Holy Spirit and let me lead the life the Spirit leads me to have.