KJV - the true Word of God... Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 01:30:29 GMT From: (Nigel B. Mitchell)

Hi, Michael

*On Sun, 24 Aug 1997 12:18:42 GMT, (Michael Kennedy) wrote:

*While I don't agree fully with the original post here, (ie. I agree no translation is perfect). I do have a comment.

*You ask why the best translators in 1611 would be more accurate than translators in the 20th century - Well, possibly because they lived in a time closer to the original language being used.

This looks like a valid comment at face value, and if there was just one source of the scriptures in the original languages, you would be quite correct. Unfortunately, there are literally thousands of sources, from manuscripts of the whole Bible to small fragments containing just a few words. More of these texts are being discovered all the time, and no two of them are identical. The task of modern translators is first to get as close as they can to the text of the original, then to translate it into modern English. I do not have the exact figurs, but I know that there are several times as many sources available to the translators of today as were available in the 17th century. From the Dead Sea Scrolls, Nag Hammadi, and the opening up of libraries in the Vatican, Moscow, and other parts of Europe and the USA, we also have access to much older and more comprehensive texts. It is therefore likely that the published Greek and Hebrew texts of today, such as that pulished by the United Bible Societies, are closer to the original text than those available 400 years ago.

*We today are much further removed from the time the manuscripts were written than those in 1611 where.

True, but our knowledge and understanding of ancient Greek and Hebrew language and culture is much greater than theirs. We have a greater understanding of the relative values of money, through the study of ancient cultures. We have a better understanding of the idiomatic use of language, through the study of Biblical and extra- iblical texts.

* I imagine if the best translators of today travelled back to 50 AD, they would learn they are still making translation errors today.

They certainly would. But the process of translation and interpretation had begun even then. Paul wrote at least three letters to the Corinthians, and we can be sure that the Corinthian Christians argued just as much as we do today about what they meant, what Paul was trying to say, and to what extend they were binding on the whole Church.

We do not have Paul's, or anyone else's originals. We have copies of copies, and translations of translations. The process of copying and translating the scriptures began at the end of the first century, and continued through the 17th century to the present day. I can see no logical, linguistic or theological reason to suppose that a particular translation, now nearly 400 years old, represents the best efforts in this process for all time.

Cheers

N+

Nigel Mitchell

....

G'day all.

* Neil Aitchison < writes:

I hesitate to start on this topic yet again, but I'm feeling naughty.

* The KJV comes from the "pure" stream of transcripts....the rest are corrupted in some or many forms....the devil has always perverted God's Word from the time of Adam and Eve....we mustn't be fooled by his age old trick of preveting God's Word to send us all into sin and wickedness....lets stick to the correct Word of God - the KJV.

A few questions:

1) Which "stream of transcripts" are you referring to? The Byzantine family, the Majority Text, or the Textus Receptus?

2) Which of the (at least) five editions of the KJV are you referring to?

3) What degree of inspiration do you believe Erasmus claimed for the Textus Receptus (Greek text on which the KJV New Testament is based)?

4) Are the parts for which Erasmus had no Greek text "pure"? (I'm thinking especially of the last six verses of Revelation which he translated into Greek from the Vulgate, and somehow made it into the KJV.)

5) What degree of inspiration do you believe the KJV translators claimed for their translation? Did they or did they not believe that a better English translation is possible?

6) The English-speaking world speaks a very different language than it did in 1611. What is the best way to overcome the culture gap?

7) Do non-English speakers have access to any "correct word of God"?

This should do for a start.

Cheers, Andrew Bromage