| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"John" |
| Date: |
21 Sep 2004 09:02:11 AM |
| Object: |
To pastor Dave |
John:
The statement below makes some unwarranted assumptions at the beginning
that lead to erroneous conclusions.
1. That the Majority Text, because it has so many witnesses (5000+) must
be more accurate and so must translations that are based upon it. Not
so. The reading of the Majority Text simply shows that scribal
inaccuracies, once introduced, were copied and recopied numerous times.
2. The guilt by association approach throws NIV and other versions out
since they are associated with other views than the literal-day theory
of creation. Actually, nothing in NIV, etc. demands another view that
the literal-day theory, but that is a question on the meaning of Hebrew
yom.
3. Notes in the modern translations about variant readings throws the
Word of God in doubt. Actually, their presence does that less than the
glosses and interpolations that the KJV has. It' not a question of
taking away from God's Word. It's a question of adding to it.
4. That the Alexandrian text was influenced by Gnosticism. Where does
that idea come from? What is the basis of it?
5. A dumbing down of the Bible is what modern translations do. One who
understands theories of translation (Fee & Stuart) realizes that
different translations do different things.
That's a brief response from one who loves the KJV (I'm writing a
commentary on the KJV text!), but realizes its shortcomings as well.
--
Vote George W. Bush in the November election!
http://www.georgewbush.com
Whether itıs taxes, jobs, health care, energy,
or national security: America canıt afford
John Kerry in the White House!
.
|
|
| User: "John" |
|
| Title: NIV argument |
22 Sep 2004 10:35:11 AM |
|
|
<< The statement below makes some unwarranted assumptions at the beginning
that lead to erroneous conclusions.
1. That the Majority Text, because it has so many witnesses (5000+) must
be more accurate and so must translations that are based upon it. Not
so. The reading of the Majority Text simply shows that scribal
inaccuracies, once introduced, were copied and recopied numerous times.
2. The guilt by association approach throws NIV and other versions out
since they are associated with other views than the literal-day theory
of creation. Actually, nothing in NIV, etc. demands another view that
the literal-day theory, but that is a question on the meaning of Hebrew
yom.
3. Notes in the modern translations about variant readings throws the
Word of God in doubt. Actually, their presence does that less than the
glosses and interpolations that the KJV has. It' not a question of
taking away from God's Word. It's a question of adding to it.
4. That the Alexandrian text was influenced by Gnosticism. Where does
that idea come from? What is the basis of it?
5. A dumbing down of the Bible is what modern translations do. One who
understands theories of translation (Fee & Stuart) realizes that
different translations do different things.
That's a brief response from one who loves the KJV (I'm writing a
commentary on the KJV text!), but realizes its shortcomings as well. >>
-------
America is back from the attack on our homeland, back from the attack on our
economy, and back from the attack on our way of life. We are back because of
the perseverance, character and leadership of George W. Bush! (Arnold
Schwarzenegger, 2004).
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
